MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412491307 · doi:10.3174/ajnr.a8722

Impact of Image Latency and Frame Rate on Simulated Remote Robotic-Assisted Neurovascular Procedures

2025· article· en· W4412491307 on OpenAlexaff
Arturo Consoli, Guillaume Charbonnier, Thais Baena Moura, Khaled Sh. Gaber, Alexander O'Neill, Thomas R. Marotta, Julian Spears, Eileen Liu, Nicole M Cancelliere, Vítor Mendes Pereira

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Neuroradiology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSurgical Simulation and Training
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeurovascular bundleMedicineLatency (audio)Frame ratePhysical medicine and rehabilitationArtificial intelligenceSurgeryComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The implementation of remote procedures represents the ultimate goal of the robotic development in the neurovascular field. Studies from remote cardiac interventions established a maximum latency threshold of 400 ms, however, no data are available for neurovascular procedures. The aim of this study was to define the maximum acceptable latency and minimum refreshment frame rate (RFR) for neuroendovascular procedures in a simulated remote setting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using a virtual simulator and an endovascular robotic arm, 7 operators performed 8 simulated aneurysm and stroke treatment interventions (4 manually and 4 robotic-assisted), during which video display of the intervention was randomly altered with different latencies (100, 250, 450, 600, 800 ms) and RFR (10, 15, 25, 30 frames per second [fps]). Operators rated the acceptability of each latency and RFR by using a modified acceptability score (mAS) and an independent observer recorded the number of dangerous uncontrolled movement (DUMs). RESULTS: Maximum acceptable latency (defined as a minimum mAS of 85%) was defined at 100 ms for manually performed procedures and at 250 ms by using robotic-assistance, whereas minimum acceptable RFR was defined at 15 fps. A total of 55 intracranial DUMs were recorded, most of which occurred at latencies ≥450 ms (49/51) and with RFRs of 10 fps (4/4). Time intervals were shorter for manual procedures, although not significantly, and for experienced operators. CONCLUSIONS: Latency during simulated neurovascular interventions influences operator performance, judgment, and confidence and maximum thresholds (250 ms) seem to be lower than those previously reported from remote cardiac interventions. In this experimental setting, RFR seemed to have a lower impact in terms of acceptance rates. Latency and RFR represent relevant parameters to define and monitor in remote environments to maximize safety.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.316 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of NeuroradiologySame topicSurgical Simulation and TrainingFrench-language works237,207