ArticleInnovative surgical sciences2025
Deep learning for automated boundary detection and segmentation in organ donation photography.
Article in Innovative surgical sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- A Scoping Review of the Photographic Assessment of Donor Liver Steatosis in Transplantation Using Artificial Intelligence.Clinical transplantation · 2026Review
- Liver margin segmentation in abdominal CT images using U-Net and Detectron2: annotated dataset for deep learning models.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Utilizing Detectron2 for accurate and efficient colon cancer detection in histopathological images.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objectives: Medical photography is ubiquitous and plays an increasingly important role in the fields of medicine and surgery. Any assessment of these photographs by computer vision algorithms requires first that the area of interest can accurately be delineated from the background. We aimed to develop deep learning segmentation models for kidney and liver organ donation photographs where accurate automated segmentation has not yet been described. Methods: Two novel deep learning models (Detectron2 and YoloV8) were developed using transfer learning and compared against existing tools for background removal (macBGRemoval, remBGisnet, remBGu2net). Anonymised photograph datasets comprised training/internal validation sets (821 kidney and 400 liver images) and external validation sets (203 kidney and 208 liver images). Each image had two segmentation labels: whole organ and clear view (parenchyma only). Intersection over Union (IoU) was the primary outcome, as the recommended metric for assessing segmentation performance. Results: In whole kidney segmentation, Detectron2 and YoloV8 outperformed other models with internal validation IoU of 0.93 and 0.94, and external validation IoU of 0.92 and 0.94, respectively. Other methods - macBGRemoval, remBGisnet and remBGu2net - scored lower, with highest internal validation IoU at 0.54 and external validation at 0.59. Similar results were observed in liver segmentation, where Detectron2 and YoloV8 both showed internal validation IoU of 0.97 and external validation of 0.92 and 0.91, respectively. The other models showed a maximum internal validation and external validation IoU of 0.89 and 0.59 respectively. All image segmentation tasks with Detectron2 and YoloV8 completed within 0.13-1.5 s per image. Conclusions: Accurate, rapid and automated image segmentation in the context of surgical photography is possible with open-source deep-learning software. These outperform existing methods and could impact the field of surgery, enabling similar advancements seen in other areas of medical computer vision.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.