Back

Automated Detection of Extrahepatic Bile Duct Stones on Intraoperative Cholangiography Using Deep Learning

He, Y.; Bloom, M.; Mirshojae, S.; Noel, L.; Qureshi, T.; Xie, Y.; Phillips, E.; Li, D.; Huang, X.

2026-08-24 surgery
10.64898/2026.08.20.26360965 medRxiv
Show abstract

Objective: To evaluate the case-level performance of deep-learning segmentation models for detecting extrahepatic bile duct stones on representative intraoperative cholangiography images (IOC) and to characterize the completeness of individual-stone localization. Background: Retained bile duct stones can cause biliary obstruction, cholangitis, and pancreatitis. However false-positive interpretation of filling defects may prompt additional downstream procedures. Computer vision has been applied to biliary anatomy recognition and IOC adequacy assessment, but patient-level stone detection and individual-stone localization remain insufficiently studyed. Methods: Representative IOC images were annotated for extrahepatic biliary anatomy and stones, with case-level stone status established using a composite clinical reference standard. Two deep-learning models were developed to delineate the common bile duct and common hepatic duct and to detect and localize stones. Case-level diagnostic performance was evaluated against the composite clinical reference standard, and individual-stone localization was evaluated against expert-reviewed annotations. Results: On the held-out 125 patients test set, MiT-B2-UNet identified 23 of 25 stone-positive cases and 95 of 100 stone-negative cases, corresponding to a sensitivity of 0.920, specificity of 0.950, and AUC of 0.986. nnU-Net identified 19 of 25 stone-positive cases and 98 of 100 stone-negative cases, corresponding to a sensitivity of 0.760, specificity of 0.980, and AUC of 0.959. At the individual-stone level, MiT-B2-UNet and nnU-Net localized 31 of 59 and 25 of 59 annotated stones, respectively; all annotated stones were localized in 13 of 25 and 12 of 25 stone-positive cases. Conclusions: Deep-learning models can identify stone-positive IOC cases and localize individual stones. This technology may help inte

Matching journals

The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.