Identifying anatomical structures on ultrasound: assistive artificial intelligence in ultrasound‐guided regional anesthesia

Abstract

Ultrasound‐guided regional anesthesia involves visualizing sono‐anatomy to guide needle insertion and the perineural injection of local anesthetic. Anatomical knowledge and recognition of anatomical structures on ultrasound are known to be imperfect amongst anesthesiologists. This investigation evaluates the performance of an assistive artificial intelligence (AI) system in aiding the identification of anatomical structures on ultrasound. Three independent experts in regional anesthesia reviewed 40 ultrasound scans of seven body regions. Unmodified ultrasound videos were presented side‐by‐side with AI‐highlighted ultrasound videos. Experts rated the overall system performance, ascertained whether highlighting helped identify specific anatomical structures, and provided opinion on whether it would help confirm the correct ultrasound view to a less experienced practitioner. Two hundred and seventy‐five assessments were performed (five videos contained inadequate views); mean highlighting scores ranged from 7.87 to 8.69 (out of 10). The Kruskal–Wallis H‐test showed a statistically significant difference in the overall performance rating (χ2[6] = 36.719, asymptotic p < 0.001); regions containing a prominent vascular landmark ranked most highly. AI‐highlighting was helpful in identifying specific anatomical structures in 1330/1334 cases (99.7%) and for confirming the correct ultrasound view in 273/275 scans (99.3%). These data demonstrate the clinical utility of an assistive AI system in aiding the identification of anatomical structures on ultrasound during ultrasound‐guided regional anesthesia. Whilst further evaluation must follow, such technology may present an opportunity to enhance clinical practice and energize the important field of clinical anatomy amongst clinicians.

Clinical Application of Artificial Intelligence: Auto-Discerning the Effectiveness of Lidocaine Concentration Levels in Osteosarcoma Femoral Tumor Segment Resection

“…Relying on image video analysis and parsing technology, it handles tasks such as target classification, target detection, and target segmentation, which are very effective in determining whether a patient's CT image contains malignant tumors and other diseases. Such computer vision-based image classification and target detection applications are useful in complex diagnoses in dermatology, radiology, and pathology as well [ 32 ]. For instance, in [ 33 ] a fully automated tool is proposed to assess viable and necrotic tumor in osteosarcoma, by utilizing 40 digitalized slide images and 13 machine learning models.…”

Exploring the utility of assistive artificial intelligence for ultrasound scanning in regional anesthesia

“…It highlights relevant anatomical structures on the ultrasound image, aiming to assist ultrasound image interpretation (see online supplemental files A–D). Expert evaluation of ultrasound videos have previously considered the color overlay to be helpful in identifying specific structures and confirming an appropriate block view in over 99% of cases 14. Similar systems include Nerveblox (Smart Alfa Teknoloji San.…”

“…Though highlighting accuracy data have been published for ScanNav and Nerveblox,14 15 there are limited data from real-world use of these systems—particularly on their utility for operators. We therefore aimed to assess the subjective utility of ScanNav as an aid to identifying relevant structures, teaching/learning UGRA scanning, and increasing operator confidence.…”

Accuracy study design: assistive AI, ultrasound-guided block

“…They evaluated the performance of an assisted AI to identify anatomical structure on ultrasound in seven body regions. Although we preferred to evaluate peripheral blocks that are commonly used in our regional anesthesia practice, Bowness et al [1] investigated most of the peripheral and plane blocks (upper and lower extremity plus abdomen/trunk). Coincidentally, our study design/methodology is almost alike; particularly in terms of independent expert assessment for validation and scoring concept except adding an expert (or validator) other than an anesthesiologist that was criticized.…”