ArticleClinical neuroradiology2026
Real-Time AI-Generated Guidewire-Out-of-View Notifications in Diagnostic Cerebral Angiography: Higher Observed Rates Among Trainees.
Article in Clinical neuroradiology, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeEvaluation of technical proficiency plays a critical role in ensuring the safety and efficacy of neuroendovascular procedures. However, objective and quantitative assessment methods that are suitable for clinical practice remain scarce or unavailable. To address this limitation, this study examined whether real-time notifications from intraoperative artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted systems can serve as objective indicators of procedural skills.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed 200 consecutive digital subtraction angiography (DSA) cases performed at our institution using a real-time AI-assisted system called neuro-vascular assist (iMed Technologies, Tokyo, Japan). The procedures were performed by either board-certified neuroendovascular specialists with extensive experience or noncertified trainees. We compared AI notifications and procedural parameters between the groups and evaluated the association between certification status and AI notifications using mixed-effects logistic regression with a random intercept for operator and adjustment for case-mix.
resultsUnivariate analysis revealed that trainees exhibited significantly higher frequency of AI notifications (62.5% vs 41.9%; P = 0.01) and longer fluoroscopy times (P = 0.02) compared to specialists. Furthermore, multivariable mixed-effects logistic regression accounting for case-mix and within-operator clustering showed twofold higher odds of an AI notification in trainees, but the association was not statistically significant (adjusted OR 2.10, 95% CI 0.68-6.49; P = 0.20).
conclusionThis study provides preliminary evidence that intraoperative AI notifications may reflect differences in technical behavior according to operator certification status. Although the adjusted association was not statistically significant, these findings suggest the potential of AI-assisted systems as proof-of-concept tools for evaluating technical proficiency. Further validation involving a larger number of operators is required.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42706342What 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.