MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086903956 · doi:10.1177/0194599814557469

Localized Intraoperative Virtual Endoscopy (LIVE) for Surgical Guidance in 16 Skull Base Patients

2014· article· en· W2086903956 on OpenAlexaff
Stephan K. Haerle, Michael J. Daly, Harley Chan, Allan Vescan, Ian Witterick, Fred Gentili, Gelareh Zadeh, Walter Kucharczyk, Jonathan C. Irish

Bibliographic record

VenueOtolaryngology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHead and Neck Surgical Oncology
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEndoscopySkullMagnetic resonance imagingSurgeryDrillRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

IMPORTANCE: Previous preclinical studies of localized intraoperative virtual endoscopy-image-guided surgery (LIVE-IGS) for skull base surgery suggest a potential clinical benefit. OBJECTIVE: The first aim was to evaluate the registration accuracy of virtual endoscopy based on high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging under clinical conditions. The second aim was to implement and assess real-time proximity alerts for critical structures during skull base drilling. DESIGN AND SETTING: Patients consecutively referred for sinus and skull base surgery were enrolled in this prospective case series. PARTICIPANTS: Five patients were used to check registration accuracy and feasibility with the subsequent 11 patients being treated under LIVE-IGS conditions with presentation to the operating surgeon (phase 2). INTERVENTION: Sixteen skull base patients were endoscopically operated on by using image-based navigation while LIVE-IGS was tested in a clinical setting. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES: Workload was quantitatively assessed using the validated National Aeronautics and Space Administration Task Load Index (NASA-TLX) questionnaire. RESULTS: Real-time localization of the surgical drill was accurate to ~1 to 2 mm in all cases. The use of 3-mm proximity alert zones around the carotid arteries and optic nerve found regular clinical use, as the median minimum distance between the tracked drill and these structures was 1 mm (0.2-3.1 mm) and 0.6 mm (0.2-2.5 mm), respectively. No statistical differences were found in the NASA-TLX indicators for this experienced surgical cohort. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Real-time proximity alerts with virtual endoscopic guidance was sufficiently accurate under clinical conditions. Further clinical evaluation is required to evaluate the potential surgical benefits, particularly for less experienced surgeons or for teaching purposes.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.758
Threshold uncertainty score0.969

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.278 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOtolaryngologySame topicHead and Neck Surgical OncologyFrench-language works237,207