Artificial Intelligence in the Autonomous Navigation of Endovascular Interventions: A Systematic Review
Fuente:
arXiv
Enregistré dans:
| Auteurs principaux: | , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Preprint |
| Publié: |
2024
|
| Sujets: | |
| Accès en ligne: | |
| Tags: |
Ajouter un tag
Pas de tags, Soyez le premier à ajouter un tag!
|
| _version_ | 1866916289544454144 |
|---|---|
| author | Robertshaw, Harry Karstensen, Lennart Jackson, Benjamin Sadati, Hadi Rhode, Kawal Ourselin, Sebastien Granados, Alejandro Booth, Thomas C |
| author_facet | Robertshaw, Harry Karstensen, Lennart Jackson, Benjamin Sadati, Hadi Rhode, Kawal Ourselin, Sebastien Granados, Alejandro Booth, Thomas C |
| contents | Purpose: Autonomous navigation of devices in endovascular interventions can decrease operation times, improve decision-making during surgery, and reduce operator radiation exposure while increasing access to treatment. This systematic review explores recent literature to assess the impact, challenges, and opportunities artificial intelligence (AI) has for the autonomous endovascular intervention navigation.
Methods: PubMed and IEEEXplore databases were queried. Eligibility criteria included studies investigating the use of AI in enabling the autonomous navigation of catheters/guidewires in endovascular interventions. Following PRISMA, articles were assessed using QUADAS-2. PROSPERO: CRD42023392259.
Results: Among 462 studies, fourteen met inclusion criteria. Reinforcement learning (9/14, 64%) and learning from demonstration (7/14, 50%) were used as data-driven models for autonomous navigation. Studies predominantly utilised physical phantoms (10/14, 71%) and in silico (4/14, 29%) models. Experiments within or around the blood vessels of the heart were reported by the majority of studies (10/14, 71%), while simple non-anatomical vessel platforms were used in three studies (3/14, 21%), and the porcine liver venous system in one study. We observed that risk of bias and poor generalisability were present across studies. No procedures were performed on patients in any of the studies reviewed. Studies lacked patient selection criteria, reference standards, and reproducibility, resulting in low clinical evidence levels.
Conclusions: AI's potential in autonomous endovascular navigation is promising, but in an experimental proof-of-concept stage, with a technology readiness level of 3. We highlight that reference standards with well-identified performance metrics are crucial to allow for comparisons of data-driven algorithms proposed in the years to come. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2405_03305 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2024 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | Artificial Intelligence in the Autonomous Navigation of Endovascular Interventions: A Systematic Review Robertshaw, Harry Karstensen, Lennart Jackson, Benjamin Sadati, Hadi Rhode, Kawal Ourselin, Sebastien Granados, Alejandro Booth, Thomas C Artificial Intelligence Robotics Purpose: Autonomous navigation of devices in endovascular interventions can decrease operation times, improve decision-making during surgery, and reduce operator radiation exposure while increasing access to treatment. This systematic review explores recent literature to assess the impact, challenges, and opportunities artificial intelligence (AI) has for the autonomous endovascular intervention navigation. Methods: PubMed and IEEEXplore databases were queried. Eligibility criteria included studies investigating the use of AI in enabling the autonomous navigation of catheters/guidewires in endovascular interventions. Following PRISMA, articles were assessed using QUADAS-2. PROSPERO: CRD42023392259. Results: Among 462 studies, fourteen met inclusion criteria. Reinforcement learning (9/14, 64%) and learning from demonstration (7/14, 50%) were used as data-driven models for autonomous navigation. Studies predominantly utilised physical phantoms (10/14, 71%) and in silico (4/14, 29%) models. Experiments within or around the blood vessels of the heart were reported by the majority of studies (10/14, 71%), while simple non-anatomical vessel platforms were used in three studies (3/14, 21%), and the porcine liver venous system in one study. We observed that risk of bias and poor generalisability were present across studies. No procedures were performed on patients in any of the studies reviewed. Studies lacked patient selection criteria, reference standards, and reproducibility, resulting in low clinical evidence levels. Conclusions: AI's potential in autonomous endovascular navigation is promising, but in an experimental proof-of-concept stage, with a technology readiness level of 3. We highlight that reference standards with well-identified performance metrics are crucial to allow for comparisons of data-driven algorithms proposed in the years to come. |
| title | Artificial Intelligence in the Autonomous Navigation of Endovascular Interventions: A Systematic Review |
| topic | Artificial Intelligence Robotics |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.03305 |