Cited by 1,468Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationSurgical Simulation and TrainingArtificial Intelligence Applications

Artificial intelligence in surgery: promises and perils

Open access
Hashimoto, Daniel A., Rosman, Guy, Rus, Daniela, Meireles, Ozanan R.·2018·Annals of Surgery

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this review was to summarize major topics in artificial intelligence (AI), including their applications and limitations in surgery. This paper reviews the key capabilities of AI to help surgeons understand and critically evaluate new AI applications and to contribute to new developments. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: AI is composed of various subfields that each provide potential solutions to clinical problems. Each of the core subfields of AI reviewed in this piece has also been used in other industries such as the autonomous car, social networks, and deep learning computers. METHODS: A review of AI papers across computer science, statistics, and medical sources was conducted to identify key concepts and techniques within AI that are driving innovation across industries, including surgery. Limitations and challenges of working with AI were also reviewed. RESULTS: Four main subfields of AI were defined: (1) machine learning, (2) artificial neural networks, (3) natural language processing, and (4) computer vision. Their current and future applications to surgical practice were introduced, including big data analytics and clinical decision support systems. The implications of AI for surgeons and the role of surgeons in advancing the technology to optimize clinical effectiveness were discussed. CONCLUSIONS: Surgeons are well positioned to help integrate AI into modern practice. Surgeons should partner with data scientists to capture data across phases of care and to provide clinical context, for AI has the potential to revolutionize the way surgery is taught and practiced with the promise of a future optimized for the highest quality patient care.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/sla.0000000000002693

Cites

61 of 61 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Video analysis of a laparoscopic procedure in real time has resulted in 92.8% accuracy in identification of all steps of the procedure and detection of missing or unexpected steps.

    “As an example, a video analysis of a laparoscopic procedure in real time has resulted in 92.8% accuracy in identification of all the steps of the procedure and surprisingly, the detection of missing or unexpected steps [26].”
  • NLP is being used to analyze data from EMRs and gather large-scale information on the late-stage complications of a certain medical condition.

    “NLP is being used to analyze data from EMRs and gather large-scale information on the late-stage complications of a certain medical condition [26].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. [24]Szeliski R Computer vision: algorithms and applications Springer Science & Business Media 2010
  2. [28]Natarajan P Frenzel JC Smaltz DH Demystifying Big Data and Machine Learning for Healthcare CRC Press 2017
  3. [41]Bellman RE Adaptive control processes: a guided tour Princeton university press 2015
  4. [43]Council NR Frontiers in massive data analysis National Academies Press 2013
  5. [56]Pearl J Causality: Models, Reasoning and Inference 2 Cambridge, UK Cambridge University Press 2009
  6. [71]Chen JH Asch SM Machine Learning and Prediction in Medicine - Beyond the Peak of Inflated Expectations N Engl J Med 2017 376 26 2507 2509 28657867 PMC5953825

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hashimoto, D. A., Rosman, G., Rus, D., & Meireles, O. R.
Affiliations
  • Massachusetts General Hospital (US)
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
Corresponding author
  • Hashimoto, Daniel A.
  • Meireles, Ozanan R.
Venue
Annals of Surgery
Published
2018-07
Volume
268
Issue
1
Pages
70-76
ISSN
  • 0003-4932 (ISSN-L)
  • 1528-1140
OpenAlex
W2790209545
Cited by
1,468
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 282 · 2025: 268 · 2024: 250 · 2023: 209 · 2022: 172 · 2021: 121 · 2020: 108 · 2019: 43 · 2018: 12
FWCI
1.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Annals of Surgery (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • DSpace@MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
Funders
  • Massachusetts General Hospital
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (T32DK007754)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Surgical Simulation and Training
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence Applications
Keywords
artificial intelligence in surgery, machine learning, artificial neural networks, natural language processing, computer vision, clinical decision support systems, big data analytics, surgical training, AI limitations
MeSH terms
Artificial Intelligence, Humans, Physician's Role, Surgical Procedures, Operative, Surgeons

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review