ReviewSurgery today2026
External validation and clinical readiness of intraoperative video AI in general surgery: a systematic review.
Review in Surgery today, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Intraoperative video artificial intelligence (AI) has advanced rapidly in general surgery, however, its dependable clinical use remains uncommon. This systematic review evaluated the use of intraoperative video AI in general surgery with an emphasis on external validation, clinical readiness, and translational maturity. Studies evaluating AI systems using intraoperative video or video-derived visual input in general surgery were systematically reviewed. Eligible applications included workflow recognition, anatomy-oriented scene understanding, instrument recognition, event detection, difficulty assessment, predictive analytics, and skill evaluation. Evidence was synthesized narratively using a structured appraisal focused on validation rigor, reporting quality, workflow relevance, and implementation-oriented characteristics of the studies. Twenty-two studies were included in the analysis. The literature is dominated by retrospective, internally validated studies. Phase, step, and workflow recognition were the most extensively investigated domains. True external validation is uncommon, prospective or deployment-grade evaluation is rare, and technical maturity generally outpaces translational maturity across task domains. Intraoperative video AI in general surgery now spans a broad range of credible technical applications. However, limited external validation, scarce prospective evaluation, and insufficient evidence for workflow-integrated performance continue to constrain its dependable clinical use. Future progress will depend on stronger evidence for generalizability, usability, and clinically meaningful benefit in real-world surgical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42496894What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.