Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42889532›Full record

ReviewAnnals of vascular diseases2026

Artificial Intelligence in Vascular and Endovascular Surgery: From Prediction to Surgeon-Led Clinical Implementation.

Tomohiro Nakajima, Toshiya Nishibe, Yutaka Iba, Junji Nakazawa, Tsuyoshi Shibata, Ayaka Arihara, Hiroki Ishige, Kyosuke Miki

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annals of vascular diseases, 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

8 authors.

Tomohiro NakajimaDivision of Cardiovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Sapporo Medical University, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan.
Toshiya NishibeFaculty of Medical Informatics, Hokkaido Information University, Ebetsu, Hokkaido, Japan.
Yutaka IbaDivision of Cardiovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Sapporo Medical University, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan.
Junji NakazawaDivision of Cardiovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Sapporo Medical University, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan.
Tsuyoshi ShibataDivision of Cardiovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Sapporo Medical University, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan.
Ayaka AriharaDivision of Cardiovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Sapporo Medical University, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan.
Hiroki IshigeDivision of Cardiovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Sapporo Medical University, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan.
Kyosuke MikiDivision of Cardiovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Sapporo Medical University, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) has shown promising performance in vascular imaging, risk prediction, procedural support, surveillance, and education, but its translation into routine surgical care remains limited. This narrative review addresses a focused question: what evidence supports the transition of vascular AI from technical prediction to surgeon-led clinical implementation? A targeted PubMed search through July 24, 2026 identified international and Japan-based studies across the perioperative pathway. Deep-learning systems can segment aortic anatomy, characterize aneurysm or dissection, and support post-EVAR imaging. Machine-learning models may stratify mortality and treatment risk, whereas computer vision, image fusion, wearable monitoring, and large language models extend potential use into procedures, follow-up, and education. Japanese reports demonstrate locally relevant innovation in aortic imaging, EVAR prognosis, postoperative monitoring, and specialty education; however, most evidence remains retrospective, single-center, or developmental. Selected surgeon-led workflows, including quantitative spinal cord imaging after aortic repair, are presented with explicit data provenance as illustrative demonstrations, not proof of clinical efficacy. Progress requires external validation, workflow and human-factors evaluation, prospective impact studies, transparent reporting, and post-deployment monitoring. AI should augment vascular specialists, with surgeons retaining responsibility for clinical questions, verification, interpretation, and patient care.

Indexed as

artificial intelligenceclinical implementationendovascular surgerymachine learningvascular surgery

Identifiers

PMID42889532
PMCPMC13669668

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.