Electromagnetically tracked partial nephrectomy navigation: demonstration of concept
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Partial nephrectomy is the preferred method for managing small renal masses. This procedure has significant advantages over radical nephrectomy. However, partial nephrectomy is under-used due to its difficulty. We propose a navigation system for laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. In this study, we evaluate the usability and accuracy of the navigation system. METHODS: An electromagnetically tracked navigation system for partial nephrectomy was developed. This system tracks the positions of the laparoscopic scissors, ultrasound probe, tumor, and calyces and vasculature. Phantom kidneys were created using mixtures of plastisol and cellulose. To test the system, the navigation display quality was measured through measurement of lag and frames per second displayed. The accuracy of the system was determined through fiducial registration. Finally, a study consisting of ten participants was conducted to assess the usability of the navigation system using the System Usability Survey. RESULTS: The mean System Usability Score of the navigation system was 82.5. The navigation display had an average lag of 243 milliseconds and showed 5 frames per second. The accuracy was measured with fiducial registration and found to have an RMS error of 2.84 mm. CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that the partial nephrectomy navigation system developed is both usable and accurate. Future work will include the conversion of the laparoscopic scissor tool tracking to optical. Further studies will be conducted to determine the effectiveness of this technology in tumor resection and avoidance of calyx and vasculature damage. We will additionally explore this system as a training tool.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".