MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404155412 · doi:10.1177/22925503241292349

Integrating AI into Breast Reconstruction Surgery: Exploring Opportunities, Applications, and Challenges

2024· review· en· W4404155412 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew Gorgy, Hong Hao Xu, Hassan ElHawary, Hillary Nepon, James Lee, Joshua Vorstenbosch

Bibliographic record

VenuePlastic Surgery · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreast reconstructionBreast surgeryMedicineMedical physicsComputer scienceBreast cancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) has significantly influenced various sectors, including healthcare, by enhancing machine capabilities in assisting with human tasks. In surgical fields, where precision and timely decision-making are crucial, AI's integration could revolutionize clinical quality and health resource optimization. This study explores the current and future applications of AI technologies in reconstructive breast surgery, aiming for broader implementation. Methods: We conducted systematic reviews through PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar using relevant keywords and MeSH terms. The focus was on the main AI subdisciplines: machine learning, computer vision, natural language processing, and robotics. This review includes studies discussing AI applications across preoperative, intraoperative, postoperative, and academic settings in breast plastic surgery. Results: AI is currently utilized preoperatively to predict surgical risks and outcomes, enhancing patient counseling and informed consent processes. During surgery, AI supports the identification of anatomical landmarks and dissection strategies and provides 3-dimensional visualizations. Robotic applications are promising for procedures like microsurgical anastomoses, flap harvesting, and dermal matrix anchoring. Postoperatively, AI predicts discharge times and customizes follow-up schedules, which improves resource allocation and patient management at home. Academically, AI offers personalized training feedback to surgical trainees and aids research in breast reconstruction. Despite these advancements, concerns regarding privacy, costs, and operational efficacy persist and are critically examined in this review. Conclusions: The application of AI in breast plastic and reconstructive surgery presents substantial benefits and diverse potentials. However, much remains to be explored and developed. This study aims to consolidate knowledge and encourage ongoing research and development within the field, thereby empowering the plastic surgery community to leverage AI technologies effectively and responsibly for advancing breast reconstruction surgery.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.603
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.174 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations18
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlastic SurgerySame topicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationFrench-language works237,207