Artificial Intelligence for Intraoperative Guidance

Why is this work in the frame?

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

Full frame distilled prediction

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.

Candidate categories

none

Consensus categories

none

Domain

Candidate signal: noneConsensus signal: none

Study design

Candidate signal: Other designConsensus signal: none

Genre

Candidate signal: EmpiricalConsensus signal: Empirical

Teacher disagreement score

0.953

Threshold uncertainty score

0.273

Validation status

machine_predicted_unvalidated · codex-gemma-dda1882f352a

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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.

Teacher spread

0.160 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work

Validation status

score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to develop and evaluate the performance of artificial intelligence (AI) models that can identify safe and dangerous zones of dissection, and anatomical landmarks during laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Many adverse events during surgery occur due to errors in visual perception and judgment leading to misinterpretation of anatomy. Deep learning, a subfield of AI, can potentially be used to provide real-time guidance intraoperatively. METHODS: Deep learning models were developed and trained to identify safe (Go) and dangerous (No-Go) zones of dissection, liver, gallbladder, and hepatocystic triangle during LC. Annotations were performed by 4 high-volume surgeons. AI predictions were evaluated using 10-fold cross-validation against annotations by expert surgeons. Primary outcomes were intersection- over-union (IOU) and F1 score (validated spatial correlation indices), and secondary outcomes were pixel-wise accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, ± standard deviation. RESULTS: AI models were trained on 2627 random frames from 290 LC videos, procured from 37 countries, 136 institutions, and 153 surgeons. Mean IOU, F1 score, accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity for the AI to identify Go zones were 0.53 (±0.24), 0.70 (±0.28), 0.94 (±0.05), 0.69 (±0.20). and 0.94 (±0.03), respectively. For No-Go zones, these metrics were 0.71 (±0.29), 0.83 (±0.31), 0.95 (±0.06), 0.80 (±0.21), and 0.98 (±0.05), respectively. Mean IOU for identification of the liver, gallbladder, and hepatocystic triangle were: 0.86 (±0.12), 0.72 (±0.19), and 0.65 (±0.22), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: AI can be used to identify anatomy within the surgical field. This technology may eventually be used to provide real-time guidance and minimize the risk of adverse events.

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.

The record

Venue

Annals of Surgery

Topic

Surgical Simulation and Training

Field

Medicine

Canadian institutions

University Health Network

Funders

National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering

Keywords

MedicineArtificial intelligenceGallbladderCholecystectomyDissection (medical)Laparoscopic cholecystectomyCystic ductDeep learningRandom forestSurgeryComputer science

Has abstract in OpenAlex

yes

API

/api/v1/works/W3101230421