Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42829367›Full record

ArticlePituitary2026

First-in-human evaluation of real-time pixel-level AI-assisted anatomical segmentation in neurosurgery: pituitary surgery as an exemplar.

Danyal Z Khan, Zhehua Mao, Anjana Wijekoon, Adrito Das, Simon C Williams, Ann Blandford, Abhiney Jain, Lauren Harris, Anouk Borg, Neil L Dorward and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pituitary, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Danyal Z KhanDept of Translational Neuroscience and Stroke, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, England, UK. d.khan@ucl.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9213-2550
Zhehua MaoDepartment of Computer Science and UCL Hawkes Institute, University College London, London, England, UK.
Anjana WijekoonDepartment of Computer Science and UCL Hawkes Institute, University College London, London, England, UK.
Adrito DasDepartment of Computer Science and UCL Hawkes Institute, University College London, London, England, UK.
Simon C WilliamsDept of Translational Neuroscience and Stroke, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, England, UK.
Ann BlandfordUCL Human Computer Interaction Centre, University College London, London, England, UK.
Abhiney JainDept of Neurosurgery, National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, Queen Square, London, England, UK.
Lauren HarrisDept of Neurosurgery, National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, Queen Square, London, England, UK.
Anouk BorgDept of Neurosurgery, National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, Queen Square, London, England, UK.
Neil L DorwardDept of Neurosurgery, National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, Queen Square, London, England, UK.
Matthew J ClarksonDepartment of Computer Science and UCL Hawkes Institute, University College London, London, England, UK.
Sophia BanoDepartment of Computer Science and UCL Hawkes Institute, University College London, London, England, UK.
Peter McCullochDepartment of Surgical Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, England, UK.
Danail StoyanovDepartment of Computer Science and UCL Hawkes Institute, University College London, London, England, UK.
Hani J MarcusDept of Translational Neuroscience and Stroke, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, England, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPrecise anatomical navigation is fundamental to safe endoscopic pituitary surgery, a high-stakes procedure characterised by a challenging learning curve. While traditional navigation systems often rely on workflow-disrupting probes or static preoperative imaging, advancements in computer vision AI (CVAI) now enable dynamic, real-time pixel-level anatomical segmentation directly from live surgical video. Our group has previously conducted a series of preclinical human-computer interaction studies to refine the system's design, alongside digital and high-fidelity physical simulations demonstrating the potential benefit of AI assistance in improving surgical performance, training, and safety. Building on this foundation, the current study represents a first-in-human evaluation of real-time pixel-level CVAI anatomical segmentation in the neurosurgical operating room - assessing feasibility, human factors and clinical outcomes, while iteratively improving the system.

methodGuided by the DECIDE-AI and IDEAL frameworks, this single-centre evaluation comprises an initial proof-of-concept of CVAI anatomical segmentation in endoscopic transsphenoidal pituitary surgery. The AI model utilised a DINOv3-derived vision transformer architecture, deployed via a high-performance edge computing unit to achieve low-latency real-time inference without reliance on cloud infrastructure. Feasibility and functionality were assessed via structured questionnaire, prospective observation, and blinded retrospective review of the recordings of the endoscopic surgical video feed and wider operating room environment. Continuous multi-stakeholder feedback through validated human factors surveys drove iterative technical refinements between cases. Routine clinical outcomes, aligning with the standard pituitary surgery core outcome set, were collected.

resultsEight patients with pituitary adenomas were enrolled. The CVAI system was successfully deployed in six cases, demonstrating acceptable real-time pixel-level sella segmentation accuracy. Deployment failed pre-operatively in two cases owing to a single platform-level boot-configuration issue. Iterative refinement between cases was driven by our experience and surgical team feedback. This resulted in the integration of additional anatomical structure segmentations (e.g., carotid arteries), enhanced model accuracy via training dataset expansion, and hardware firmware upgrades. Multi-stakeholder surveys demonstrated satisfactory system feasibility, usability, and acceptability among the surgical team. Both prospective observation and retrospective video review confirmed the absence of adverse events, including no significant distraction to the primary surgeon, and there were no AI-related clinical complications.

conclusionThis first-in-human early clinical evaluation (IDEAL Stage 1) of real-time pixel-level AI anatomical segmentation in live neurosurgery demonstrates feasibility, showcases iterative system evolution, and reports clinical and human factors outcomes. Future work will include a larger single-centre case series (IDEAL Stage 2a) with more surgical teams to further iterate the system and explore its impact on safety, training and workflow. As the underpinning AI models improve and integrate with other intra-operative navigational technologies, such tools will likely be the cornerstone of intra-operative surgical decision support systems.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceNeurosurgical ProceduresPituitary GlandHumansNeurosurgeryPituitary NeoplasmsArtificial intelligenceComputer visionEndoscopyHuman factorsPituitary surgery

Identifiers

PMID42829367
PMCPMC13634013

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.