Machine-Learning Augmented Optical Tissue Sensing for Intraoperative Guidance in Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Pedicle-screw malposition and canal breach can cause major neurologic and vascular complications. Fluoroscopy, navigation, and robotics guide trajectory, but they do not directly identify the tissue in front of the instrument. We evaluated machine learning (ML)-augmented optical sensing for tissue discrimination in spine-relevant settings. Methods: We conducted a PRISMA-DTA systematic review under a prospectively registered PROSPERO protocol and searched five databases. Classification accuracy was pooled with random-effects models and reported with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and prediction intervals (PI). Study quality was assessed with QUADAS-2 and separate ML-specific signaling questions. Results: Eight studies met the inclusion criteria. Five single-group ex vivo or cadaveric classification studies entered the meta-analysis, four using porcine tissue. Across individual spectra, image patches, or images, pooled classification accuracy was 95.9% (95% CI, 93.5–97.7%), with substantial between-study variation (I2 = 99.4%; 95% PI, 89.8–99.4%). A sensitivity analysis using subject counts as the denominator yielded 97.36% (95% CI, 87.46–100.00%). Because outcomes were not reported at the subject-level, this estimate should not be read as patient-level accuracy. No study tested intraoperative tissue classification in living humans or performed external validation, and one had a high risk of data leakage. Two non-ML perfusion studies were retained only to describe a prespecified evidence gap. Conclusions: ML-augmented optical sensing can distinguish spine-relevant tissues in controlled preclinical settings. Current evidence does not establish intraoperative or patient-level performance. The literature remains small, heterogeneous, predominantly preclinical, and without external validation. Prospective in vivo human studies with independent validation are needed before these systems can support intraoperative decision-making.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Optics
Published
2026-08-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/opt7050062
Primary Topic
Spinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Machine-Learning Augmented Optical Tissue Sensing for Intraoperative Guidance in Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Rohan A. Phadke, Alireza Tavakkoli, Ajay Tripuraneni, James Rizkalla et al.
Optics
Spinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques
article

Machine-Learning Augmented Optical Tissue Sensing for Intraoperative Guidance in Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Rohan A. Phadke, Alireza Tavakkoli, Ajay Tripuraneni, James Rizkalla, Ethan Waisberg, Samer Salman, Zane G. Salman, Joshua Ong, Ryan Zeitouny, Neil Panwalker, Rahul Kumar, Sainyam Galhotra, Sai Sarnala
article en

Abstract

Background: Pedicle-screw malposition and canal breach can cause major neurologic and vascular complications. Fluoroscopy, navigation, and robotics guide trajectory, but they do not directly identify the tissue in front of the instrument. We evaluated machine learning (ML)-augmented optical sensing for tissue discrimination in spine-relevant settings. Methods: We conducted a PRISMA-DTA systematic review under a prospectively registered PROSPERO protocol and searched five databases. Classification accuracy was pooled with random-effects models and reported with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and prediction intervals (PI). Study quality was assessed with QUADAS-2 and separate ML-specific signaling questions. Results: Eight studies met the inclusion criteria. Five single-group ex vivo or cadaveric classification studies entered the meta-analysis, four using porcine tissue. Across individual spectra, image patches, or images, pooled classification accuracy was 95.9% (95% CI, 93.5–97.7%), with substantial between-study variation (I2 = 99.4%; 95% PI, 89.8–99.4%). A sensitivity analysis using subject counts as the denominator yielded 97.36% (95% CI, 87.46–100.00%). Because outcomes were not reported at the subject-level, this estimate should not be read as patient-level accuracy. No study tested intraoperative tissue classification in living humans or performed external validation, and one had a high risk of data leakage. Two non-ML perfusion studies were retained only to describe a prespecified evidence gap. Conclusions: ML-augmented optical sensing can distinguish spine-relevant tissues in controlled preclinical settings. Current evidence does not establish intraoperative or patient-level performance. The literature remains small, heterogeneous, predominantly preclinical, and without external validation. Prospective in vivo human studies with independent validation are needed before these systems can support intraoperative decision-making.

OpticsVol. 7(5)
Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary (US), University of Nevada, Reno (US), Harvard University (US), University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School (US), Baylor College of Medicine (US), Cornell University (US), University of Cambridge (GB), Baylor University Medical Center (US), The University of Texas at Austin (US), Texas A&M University (US)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Spinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.