Use of artificial intelligence for decision-support to avoid high-risk behaviors during laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

INTRODUCTION: Bile duct injuries (BDIs) are a significant source of morbidity among patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). GoNoGoNet is an artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm that has been developed and validated to identify safe ("Go") and dangerous ("No-Go") zones of dissection during LC, with the potential to prevent BDIs through real-time intraoperative decision-support. This study evaluates GoNoGoNet's ability to predict Go/No-Go zones during LCs with BDIs. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: Eleven LC videos with BDI (BDI group) were annotated by GoNoGoNet. All tool-tissue interactions, including the one that caused the BDI, were characterized in relation to the algorithm's predicted location of Go/No-Go zones. These were compared to another 11 LC videos with cholecystitis (control group) deemed to represent "safe cholecystectomy" by experts. The probability threshold of GoNoGoNet annotations were then modulated to determine its relationship to Go/No-Go predictions. Data is shown as % difference [99% confidence interval]. RESULTS: Compared to control, the BDI group showed significantly greater proportion of sharp dissection (+ 23.5% [20.0-27.0]), blunt dissection (+ 32.1% [27.2-37.0]), and total interactions (+ 33.6% [31.0-36.2]) outside of the Go zone. Among injury-causing interactions, 4 (36%) were in the No-Go zone, 2 (18%) were in the Go zone, and 5 (45%) were outside both zones, after maximizing the probability threshold of the Go algorithm. CONCLUSION: AI has potential to detect unsafe dissection and prevent BDIs through real-time intraoperative decision-support. More work is needed to determine how to optimize integration of this technology into the operating room workflow and adoption by end-users.

What is the educational value and clinical utility of artificial intelligence for intraoperative and postoperative video analysis? A survey of surgeons and trainees.

INTRODUCTION: Surgical complications often occur due to lapses in judgment and decision-making. Advances in artificial intelligence (AI) have made it possible to train algorithms that identify anatomy and interpret the surgical field. These algorithms can potentially be used for intraoperative decision-support and postoperative video analysis and feedback. Despite the very early success of proof-of-concept algorithms, it remains unknown whether this innovation meets the needs of end-users or how best to deploy it. This study explores users' opinion on the value, usability and design for adapting AI in operating rooms. METHODS: A device-agnostic web-accessible software was developed to provide AI inference either (1) intraoperatively on a live video stream (synchronous mode), or (2) on an uploaded video or image file (asynchronous mode) postoperatively for feedback. A validated AI model (GoNoGoNet), which identifies safe and dangerous zones of dissection during laparoscopic cholecystectomy, was used as the use case. Surgeons and trainees performing laparoscopic cholecystectomy interacted with the AI platform and completed a 5-point Likert scale survey to evaluate the educational value, usability and design of the platform. RESULTS: Twenty participants (11 surgeons and 9 trainees) evaluated the platform intraoperatively (n = 10) and postoperatively (n = 11). The majority agreed or strongly agreed that AI is an effective adjunct to surgical training (81%; neutral = 10%), effective for providing real-time feedback (70%; neutral = 20%), postoperative feedback (73%; neutral = 27%), and capable of improving surgeon confidence (67%; neutral = 29%). Only 40% (neutral = 50%) and 57% (neutral = 43%) believe that the tool is effective in improving intraoperative decisions and performance, or beneficial for patient care, respectively. Overall, 38% (neutral = 43%) reported they would use this platform consistently if available. The majority agreed or strongly agreed that the platform was easy to use (81%; neutral = 14%) and has acceptable resolution (62%; neutral = 24%), while 30% (neutral = 20%) reported that it disrupted the OR workflow, and 20% (neutral = 0%) reported significant time lag. All respondents reported that such a system should be available "on-demand" to turn on/off at their discretion. CONCLUSIONS: Most found AI to be a useful tool for providing support and feedback to surgeons, despite several implementation obstacles. The study findings will inform the future design and usability of this technology in order to optimize its clinical impact and adoption by end-users.