Real-time Computer Vision Assisted Navigation for Endoscopic Pituitary Surgery: Iterative Development and Comparative Preclinical Evaluation

Read the full article See related articles

Discuss this preprint

Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?

Listed in

This article is not in any list yet, why not save it to one of your lists.
Log in to save this article

Abstract

Background Endoscopic pituitary surgery involves navigating high-stakes anatomy where complications, such as carotid artery injury, cause devastating morbidity. While computer vision AI offers potential for real-time anatomical recognition to mitigate these risks, successful translation requires rigorous human-factors and performance evaluation. We present the iterative development and preclinical evaluation of a surgeon-controlled, real-time AI-assisted navigation system. Methods Guided by IDEAL Stage 0 and DECIDE-AI frameworks, the study was conducted in two phases. Phase 1 was an exploratory study where surgeons used the system during high-fidelity simulated surgery and provided feedback via "Think Aloud" protocols and surveys. Following prototype iteration, a Phase 2 randomized crossover comparative trial was conducted with 19 neurosurgeons (15 trainees, 4 experts) performing high-fidelity simulated tumour resections with and without AI assistance, separated by a minimum 2-week washout. The primary outcome was surgical technical performance (OSATS). Workload, educational value, usability, trust, and implementation outcomes were also assessed. Results Phase 1 informed hardware, model, and interface refinements, including optimized pedal-controlled overlays and prediction confidence metrics. In the comparative trial, AI assistance significantly improved overall technical performance (OSATS 19.79+/-4.06 vs. 17.32+/-4.11; p=0.027). This gain was experience-dependent; AI significantly augmented trainee performance (19.20+/-3.76 vs. 16.60+/-3.78), narrowing the proficiency gap, while expert performance remained high and stable. 100% of participants identified the system as a useful training tool. However, subjective workload was significantly higher in the AI arm (SURG-TLX 26.42+/-9.56 vs. 22.26+/-7.81; p=0.014). Despite this, usability (SUS 75.13+/-14.31) and implementation feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness scores were consistently high (means >4.4/5). Conclusions This study provides a stepwise process for real-time AI development using pituitary surgery as a high-stakes exemplar. The refined surgeon-centric AI system improves training and technical performance, particularly for trainees. Next steps involve first-in-human studies and further exploration of longer-term human factors such as over-reliance, cognitive overload mitigation and trust calibration.

Article activity feed