Artificial Intelligence for Computer Vision in Surgery: A Call for Developing Reporting Guidelines

Adoption of routine surgical video recording: a nationwide freedom of information act request across England and Wales

Background

Surgical video contains data with significant potential to improve surgical outcome assessment, quality assurance, education, and research. Current utilisation of surgical video recording is unknown and related policies/governance structures are unclear.

Methods

A nationwide Freedom of Information (FOI) request concerning surgical video recording, technology, consent, access, and governance was sent to all acute National Health Service (NHS) trusts/boards in England/Wales between 20th February and 20th March 2023.

Findings

140/144 (97.2%) trusts/boards in England/Wales responded to the FOI request. Surgical procedures were routinely recorded in 22 trusts/boards. The median estimate of consultant surgeons routinely recording their procedures was 20%. Surgical video was stored on internal systems (n = 27), third-party products (n = 29), and both (n = 9). 32/140 (22.9%) trusts/boards ask for consent to record procedures as part of routine care. Consent for recording included non-clinical purposes in 55/140 (39.3%) trusts/boards. Policies for surgeon/patient access to surgical video were available in 48/140 (34.3%) and 32/140 (22.9%) trusts/boards, respectively. Surgical video was used for non-clinical purposes in 64/140 (45.7%) trusts/boards. Governance policies covering surgical video recording, use, and/or storage were available from 59/140 (42.1%) trusts/boards.

Interpretation

There is significant heterogeneity in surgical video recording practices in England and Wales. A minority of trusts/boards routinely record surgical procedures, with large variation in recording/storage practices indicating scope for NHS-wide coordination. Revision of surgical video consent, accessibility, and governance policies should be prioritised by trusts/boards to protect key stakeholders. Increased availability of surgical video is essential for patients and surgeons to maximally benefit from the ongoing digital transformation of surgery.

Funding

KL is supported by an NIHR Academic Clinical Fellowship and acknowledges infrastructure support for this research from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Imperial Biomedical Research Centre (BRC).

SAGES consensus recommendations on surgical video data use, structure, and exploration (for research in artificial intelligence, clinical quality improvement, and surgical education)

BACKGROUND

Surgery generates a vast amount of data from each procedure. Particularly video data provides significant value for surgical research, clinical outcome assessment, quality control, and education. The data lifecycle is influenced by various factors, including data structure, acquisition, storage, and sharing; data use and exploration, and finally data governance, which encompasses all ethical and legal regulations associated with the data. There is a universal need among stakeholders in surgical data science to establish standardized frameworks that address all aspects of this lifecycle to ensure data quality and purpose.

METHODS

Working groups were formed, among 48 representatives from academia and industry, including clinicians, computer scientists and industry representatives. These working groups focused on: Data Use, Data Structure, Data Exploration, and Data Governance. After working group and panel discussions, a modified Delphi process was conducted.

RESULTS

The resulting Delphi consensus provides conceptualized and structured recommendations for each domain related to surgical video data. We identified the key stakeholders within the data lifecycle and formulated comprehensive, easily understandable, and widely applicable guidelines for data utilization. Standardization of data structure should encompass format and quality, data sources, documentation, metadata, and account for biases within the data. To foster scientific data exploration, datasets should reflect diversity and remain adaptable to future applications. Data governance must be transparent to all stakeholders, addressing legal and ethical considerations surrounding the data.

CONCLUSION

This consensus presents essential recommendations around the generation of standardized and diverse surgical video databanks, accounting for multiple stakeholders involved in data generation and use throughout its lifecycle. Following the SAGES annotation framework, we lay the foundation for standardization of data use, structure, and exploration. A detailed exploration of requirements for adequate data governance will follow.

Technical skill assessment in minimally invasive surgery using artificial intelligence: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Technical skill assessment in surgery relies on expert opinion. Therefore, it is time-consuming, costly, and often lacks objectivity. Analysis of intraoperative data by artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential for automated technical skill assessment. The aim of this systematic review was to analyze the performance, external validity, and generalizability of AI models for technical skill assessment in minimally invasive surgery.

METHODS

A systematic search of Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and IEEE Xplore was performed to identify original articles reporting the use of AI in the assessment of technical skill in minimally invasive surgery. Risk of bias (RoB) and quality of the included studies were analyzed according to Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies criteria and the modified Joanna Briggs Institute checklists, respectively. Findings were reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement.

RESULTS

In total, 1958 articles were identified, 50 articles met eligibility criteria and were analyzed. Motion data extracted from surgical videos (n = 25) or kinematic data from robotic systems or sensors (n = 22) were the most frequent input data for AI. Most studies used deep learning (n = 34) and predicted technical skills using an ordinal assessment scale (n = 36) with good accuracies in simulated settings. However, all proposed models were in development stage, only 4 studies were externally validated and 8 showed a low RoB.

CONCLUSION

AI showed good performance in technical skill assessment in minimally invasive surgery. However, models often lacked external validity and generalizability. Therefore, models should be benchmarked using predefined performance metrics and tested in clinical implementation studies.

Artificial Intelligence in Surgery and Its Potential for Gastric Cancer

Artificial intelligence (AI) has made significant progress in recent years, and many medical fields are attempting to introduce AI technology into clinical practice. Currently, much research is being conducted to evaluate that AI can be incorporated into surgical procedures to make them safer and more efficient, subsequently to obtain better outcomes for patients. In this paper, we review basic AI research regarding surgery and discuss the potential for implementing AI technology in gastric cancer surgery. At present, research and development is focused on AI technologies that assist the surgeon's understandings and judgment during surgery, such as anatomical navigation. AI systems are also being developed to recognize in which the surgical phase is ongoing. Such a surgical phase recognition systems is considered for effective storage of surgical videos and education, in the future, for use in systems to objectively evaluate the skill of surgeons. At this time, it is not considered practical to let AI make intraoperative decisions or move forceps automatically from an ethical standpoint, too. At present, AI research on surgery has various limitations, and it is desirable to develop practical systems that will truly benefit clinical practice in the future.

Artificial intelligence in medical device software and high-risk medical devices - a review of definitions, expert recommendations and regulatory initiatives

INTRODUCTION

Artificial intelligence (AI) encompasses a wide range of algorithms with risks when used to support decisions about diagnosis or treatment, so professional and regulatory bodies are recommending how they should be managed.

AREAS COVERED

AI systems may qualify as standalone medical device software (MDSW) or be embedded within a medical device. Within the European Union (EU) AI software must undergo a conformity assessment procedure to be approved as a medical device. The draft EU Regulation on AI proposes rules that will apply across industry sectors, while for devices the Medical Device Regulation also applies. In the CORE-MD project (Coordinating Research and Evidence for Medical Devices), we have surveyed definitions and summarize initiatives made by professional consensus groups, regulators, and standardization bodies.

EXPERT OPINION

The level of clinical evidence required should be determined according to each application and to legal and methodological factors that contribute to risk, including accountability, transparency, and interpretability. EU guidance for MDSW based on international recommendations does not yet describe the clinical evidence needed for medical AI software. Regulators, notified bodies, manufacturers, clinicians and patients would all benefit from common standards for the clinical evaluation of high-risk AI applications and transparency of their evidence and performance.

Multicentric validation of EndoDigest: a computer vision platform for video documentation of the critical view of safety in laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

A computer vision (CV) platform named EndoDigest was recently developed to facilitate the use of surgical videos. Specifically, EndoDigest automatically provides short video clips to effectively document the critical view of safety (CVS) in laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). The aim of the present study is to validate EndoDigest on a multicentric dataset of LC videos.

METHODS

LC videos from 4 centers were manually annotated with the time of the cystic duct division and an assessment of CVS criteria. Incomplete recordings, bailout procedures and procedures with an intraoperative cholangiogram were excluded. EndoDigest leveraged predictions of deep learning models for workflow analysis in a rule-based inference system designed to estimate the time of the cystic duct division. Performance was assessed by computing the error in estimating the manually annotated time of the cystic duct division. To provide concise video documentation of CVS, EndoDigest extracted video clips showing the 2 min preceding and the 30 s following the predicted cystic duct division. The relevance of the documentation was evaluated by assessing CVS in automatically extracted 2.5-min-long video clips.

RESULTS

144 of the 174 LC videos from 4 centers were analyzed. EndoDigest located the time of the cystic duct division with a mean error of 124.0 ± 270.6 s despite the use of fluorescent cholangiography in 27 procedures and great variations in surgical workflows across centers. The surgical evaluation found that 108 (75.0%) of the automatically extracted short video clips documented CVS effectively.

CONCLUSIONS

EndoDigest was robust enough to reliably locate the time of the cystic duct division and efficiently video document CVS despite the highly variable workflows. Training specifically on data from each center could improve results; however, this multicentric validation shows the potential for clinical translation of this surgical data science tool to efficiently document surgical safety.

An Evolution Gaining Momentum—The Growing Role of Artificial Intelligence in the Diagnosis and Treatment of Spinal Diseases

In recent years, applications using artificial intelligence have been gaining importance in the diagnosis and treatment of spinal diseases. In our review, we describe the basic features of artificial intelligence which are currently applied in the field of spine diagnosis and treatment, and we provide an orientation of the recent technical developments and their applications. Furthermore, we point out the possible limitations and challenges in dealing with such technological advances. Despite the momentary limitations in practical application, artificial intelligence is gaining ground in the field of spine treatment. As an applying physician, it is therefore necessary to engage with it in order to benefit from those advances in the interest of the patient and to prevent these applications being misused by non-medical partners.