Microsurgical Clipping of an Anterior Communicating Artery Aneurysm Using a Novel Robotic Visualization Tool in Lieu of the Binocular Operating Microscope: Operative Video
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The binocular operating microscope has been the visualization instrument of choice for microsurgical clipping of intracranial aneurysms for many decades. OBJECTIVE: To discuss recent technological advances that have provided novel visualization tools, which may prove to be superior to the binocular operating microscope in many regards. METHODS: We present an operative video and our operative experience with the BrightMatterTM Servo System (Synaptive Medical, Toronto, Ontario, Canada) during the microsurgical clipping of an anterior communicating artery aneurysm. To the best of our knowledge, the use of this device for the microsurgical clipping of an intracranial aneurysm has never been described in the literature. RESULTS: The BrightMatterTM Servo System (Synaptive Medical) is a surgical exoscope which avoids many of the ergonomic constraints of the binocular operating microscope, but is associated with a steep learning curve. The BrightMatterTM Servo System (Synaptive Medical) is a maneuverable surgical exoscope that is positioned with a directional aiming device and a surgeon-controlled foot pedal. While utilizing this device comes with a steep learning curve typical of any new technology, the BrightMatterTM Servo System (Synaptive Medical) has several advantages over the conventional surgical microscope, which include a relatively unobstructed surgical field, provision of high-definition images, and visualization of difficult angles/trajectories. CONCLUSION: This device can easily be utilized as a visualization tool for a variety of cranial and spinal procedures in lieu of the binocular operating microscope. We anticipate that this technology will soon become an integral part of the neurosurgeon's armamentarium.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".