This is an early access version, the complete PDF, HTML, and XML versions will be available soon.
Open AccessArticle
Understanding Surgeons’ Reluctance to Adopt Intraoperative Coronary Graft Verification Procedures: A Literature Review Combined to AI-Driven Insights Under Human Supervision
by
Gabriele Di Giammarco
Gabriele Di Giammarco 1,2,*,†,
Federico Cammertoni
Federico Cammertoni 3,†,
Nicola Testa
Nicola Testa 3,† and
Massimo Massetti
Massimo Massetti 2,3,†
1
Department of Neuroscience, Imaging and Clinical Science, School of Medicine and Health Science, Università “G.D’Annunzio” Chieti–Pescara, 66100 Chieti, Italy
2
Faculty of Medicine and Surgery, Catholic University of Sacred Heart, 00168 Rome, Italy
3
Department of Cardiovascular Sciences, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario “A. Gemelli” IRCCS, 00168 Rome, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
†
These authors contributed equally to the research.
J. Clin. Med. 2024, 13(22), 6889; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13226889 (registering DOI)
Submission received: 10 October 2024
/
Revised: 10 November 2024
/
Accepted: 12 November 2024
/
Published: 15 November 2024
Abstract
Background: Intraoperative graft verification in coronary surgery is accepted worldwidand equally discussed. In spite of multiple sources of evidence published up to now in favor of clinical benefits following the use of the procedure, there is a persistent skepticism in adopting the available technologies. The object of the present review is to analyze the reluctance of surgeons toward the adoption of assessment methods. Materials and Method: A thorough literature review was carried out on Google Scholar based on the results obtained from AI’s answer to the question about the reasons for that reluctance. We took advantage of using ChatGPT-4 since the research based on PubMed Central alone was not able to return a detailed response, maybe because the reasons for the reluctance are veiled in the text of the published papers. Through the items suggested by AI and taken from the literature, we deepened the research, pointing attention to the issues published so far about the various technologies. Results: There are many convincing pieces of evidence about the utility of intraoperative graft control in coronary surgery, involving improved clinical outcome, efficacy and safety, and social cost saving. The opinion that arose through this analysis is that, beyond the objective difficulties in utilizing some technologies and the equally objective limitations of an economic and organizational nature, the reluctance is the result of a real unwillingness based on the various implications that the discovery of the technical error entails. Conclusions: This negative attitude, in light of the convincing scientific and clinical evidence published up to now, appears to overwhelm the benefits for patients.
Share and Cite
MDPI and ACS Style
Giammarco, G.D.; Cammertoni, F.; Testa, N.; Massetti, M.
Understanding Surgeons’ Reluctance to Adopt Intraoperative Coronary Graft Verification Procedures: A Literature Review Combined to AI-Driven Insights Under Human Supervision. J. Clin. Med. 2024, 13, 6889.
https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13226889
AMA Style
Giammarco GD, Cammertoni F, Testa N, Massetti M.
Understanding Surgeons’ Reluctance to Adopt Intraoperative Coronary Graft Verification Procedures: A Literature Review Combined to AI-Driven Insights Under Human Supervision. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2024; 13(22):6889.
https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13226889
Chicago/Turabian Style
Giammarco, Gabriele Di, Federico Cammertoni, Nicola Testa, and Massimo Massetti.
2024. "Understanding Surgeons’ Reluctance to Adopt Intraoperative Coronary Graft Verification Procedures: A Literature Review Combined to AI-Driven Insights Under Human Supervision" Journal of Clinical Medicine 13, no. 22: 6889.
https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13226889
Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details
here.
Article Metrics
Article Access Statistics
For more information on the journal statistics, click
here.
Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.