This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
Background: Real-time computer vision-based artificial intelligence (CV-AI) systems for surgical video analysis are rapidly advancing. Current evaluation strategies and clinical-readiness reporting, however, remain inconsistent. This scoping review mapped contemporary CV-AI task domains, performance metrics, and evidence of readiness for real-time intraoperative deployment within general surgery. Methods: This study followed Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews, and was reported in accordance with PRISMA-ScR. Eligible studies were identified by systematic literature search of the MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, and Scopus databases. All studies published between 1 June 2015 and 1 June 2025 were eligible. Results: A total of 490 articles were screened, with 113 studies meeting the inclusion criteria after full-text review. Retrospective feasibility analyses predominated, with only 13 studies (12%) evaluating real-time intraoperative integration. Five task domains were identified (phase recognition, anatomy identification, action-event recognition, instrument tracking, and skill-assessment). Forty-one unique performance metrics were reported, with predominant use of discrimination-style summary measures (e.g., accuracy, recall, F1 score), and comparatively sparse reporting of class imbalance, boundary-aware (e.g., Hausdorff distance) or real-time workflow factors (e.g., latency/stability, interface design, surgeon feedback). External validation was described in 13 (12%) studies. Nine studies (8%) referenced artificial intelligence-specific reporting frameworks. Conclusion: Surgical CV-AI is advancing technically, but remains predominantly at an early feasibility stage. Variability in current metric application and limited real-time clinical evaluation limit potential for comparability, applicability and widespread adoption. Standardised metrics, evaluation frameworks, prospective clinical trials, and collaborative end-user engagement are critical to translate conceptual promise to reliable real-time decision-support tools that support surgeon judgement and integrate seamlessly into routine operative workflows.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Buchanan et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: