Welcome to the new version of CaltechAUTHORS. Login is currently restricted to library staff. If you notice any issues, please email coda@library.caltech.edu
Published May 17, 2022 | Submitted + Supplemental Material + Published
Journal Article Open

Expert surgeons and deep learning models can predict the outcome of surgical hemorrhage from 1 min of video

Abstract

Major vascular injury resulting in uncontrolled bleeding is a catastrophic and often fatal complication of minimally invasive surgery. At the outset of these events, surgeons do not know how much blood will be lost or whether they will successfully control the hemorrhage (achieve hemostasis). We evaluate the ability of a deep learning neural network (DNN) to predict hemostasis control ability using the first minute of surgical video and compare model performance with human experts viewing the same video. The publicly available SOCAL dataset contains 147 videos of attending and resident surgeons managing hemorrhage in a validated, high-fidelity cadaveric simulator. Videos are labeled with outcome and blood loss (mL). The first minute of 20 videos was shown to four, blinded, fellowship trained skull-base neurosurgery instructors, and to SOCALNet (a DNN trained on SOCAL videos). SOCALNet architecture included a convolutional network (ResNet) identifying spatial features and a recurrent network identifying temporal features (LSTM). Experts independently assessed surgeon skill, predicted outcome and blood loss (mL). Outcome and blood loss predictions were compared with SOCALNet. Expert inter-rater reliability was 0.95. Experts correctly predicted 14/20 trials (Sensitivity: 82%, Specificity: 55%, Positive Predictive Value (PPV): 69%, Negative Predictive Value (NPV): 71%). SOCALNet correctly predicted 17/20 trials (Sensitivity 100%, Specificity 66%, PPV 79%, NPV 100%) and correctly identified all successful attempts. Expert predictions of the highest and lowest skill surgeons and expert predictions reported with maximum confidence were more accurate. Experts systematically underestimated blood loss (mean error − 131 mL, RMSE 350 mL, R2 0.70) and fewer than half of expert predictions identified blood loss > 500 mL (47.5%, 19/40). SOCALNet had superior performance (mean error − 57 mL, RMSE 295 mL, R² 0.74) and detected most episodes of blood loss > 500 mL (80%, 8/10). In validation experiments, SOCALNet evaluation of a critical on-screen surgical maneuver and high/low-skill composite videos were concordant with expert evaluation. Using only the first minute of video, experts and SOCALNet can predict outcome and blood loss during surgical hemorrhage. Experts systematically underestimated blood loss, and SOCALNet had no false negatives. DNNs can provide accurate, meaningful assessments of surgical video. We call for the creation of datasets of surgical adverse events for quality improvement research.

Additional Information

© The Author(s) 2022. This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. Received 22 December 2021; Accepted 18 April 2022; Published 17 May 2022. Data availability: The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available in the figshare repository, link: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.15132468.v1. Contributions: Study design: D.J.P., G.K., A.S., G.Z., D.A.D. Data acquisition: D.J.P., G.K., B.S., M.R., G.Z., D.A.D. Model development: D.J.P., G.K., A.S., V.U., X.H., V.P., D.A.D. Statistical analysis: D.J.P., G.K., D.A.D. Writing—original draft: D.J.P., G.K., D.A.D. Writing—revisions: All authors. Final approval: All authors. Study supervision: G.Z., D.A.D. The authors declare no competing interests.

Attached Files

Published - s41598-022-11549-2.pdf

Submitted - 2022.01.22.22269640v1.full.pdf

Supplemental Material - 41598_2022_11549_MOESM1_ESM.docx

Supplemental Material - 41598_2022_11549_MOESM2_ESM.pdf

Files

2022.01.22.22269640v1.full.pdf
Files (4.2 MB)
Name Size Download all
md5:5ff2e6136fdf29ff01d72aeb44977d56
1.4 MB Preview Download
md5:3929d12688b4e038b457925ba481774f
967.7 kB Preview Download
md5:09d4407670d7112445211deb4402c771
1.8 MB Preview Download
md5:02bcf61d6fa894642d40036f83728900
29.6 kB Download

Additional details

Created:
August 22, 2023
Modified:
October 23, 2023