ArticleCVIR endovascular2026
Introduction and validation of OSCAR-optimal stent choice algorithm.
Article in CVIR endovascular, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeStandardization and international guidelines for stent size selection are lacking. In this study, we introduce and validate an artificial intelligence (AI)- and image processing-supported, modular software algorithm trained on a multicentric vascular segmentation dataset that identifies stenoses, performs segmentations of stenotic vessel segments and suggests the optimal stent size for implantation. MATERIAL AND
methodsThis retrospective multicenter study included 149 patients who underwent stent implantation for symptomatic stenoses of the common and external iliac arteries between August 2017 and July 2024. Peri-interventional angiography datasets were evaluated by four board-certified interventional radiologists. For AI-training, all relevant stenoses were annotated and segmented to reflect intended stent sizing. The segmentation criteria were consensus-defined, and all readers completed a prior training session to ensure consistency. The modular algorithm comprises components for stenosis detection, segmentation and stent parameter prediction. Following pre-training on a publicly available coronary artery dataset, the model was fine-tuned on the study-specific iliac artery dataset using leave-one-out cross-validation.
resultsOSCAR detected stenoses in 84.6% of cases. The model achieved a high recall (0.89 ± 0.21), meaning that most expert-annotated stenoses were correctly identified, while a moderate precision (0.65 ± 0.28) indicated some false-positive detections. Segmentation accuracy was good (DSC 0.77 ± 0.11). Stent diameter and length predictions demonstrated mean absolute percentage errors of 0.13 ± 0.18 and 0.33 ± 0.31, respectively, comparable to expert variability.
conclusionsThis proof-of-concept study demonstrates the potential of AI-assisted stent selection in vascular interventions. Furthermore, the option of a closed-loop framework promotes sustainability, reproducibility and cost-effectiveness in stent implantation procedures.
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.