REVIEW 2 cited by
CholecTrack20: A Multi-Perspective Tracking Dataset for Surgical Tools
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
CholecTrack20: A Multi-Perspective Tracking Dataset for Surgical Tools
read the original abstract
Tool tracking in surgical videos is essential for advancing computer-assisted interventions, such as skill assessment, safety zone estimation, and human-machine collaboration. However, the lack of context-rich datasets limits AI applications in this field. Existing datasets rely on overly generic tracking formalizations that fail to capture surgical-specific dynamics, such as tools moving out of the camera's view or exiting the body. This results in less clinically relevant trajectories and a lack of flexibility for real-world surgical applications. Methods trained on these datasets often struggle with visual challenges such as smoke, reflection, and bleeding, further exposing the limitations of current approaches. We introduce CholecTrack20, a specialized dataset for multi-class, multi-tool tracking in surgical procedures. It redefines tracking formalization with three perspectives: (i) intraoperative, (ii) intracorporeal, and (iii) visibility, enabling adaptable and clinically meaningful tool trajectories. The dataset comprises 20 full-length surgical videos, annotated at 1 fps, yielding over 35K frames and 65K labeled tool instances. Annotations include spatial location, category, identity, operator, phase, and scene visual challenge. Benchmarking state-of-the-art methods on CholecTrack20 reveals significant performance gaps, with current approaches (< 45\% HOTA) failing to meet the accuracy required for clinical translation. These findings motivate the need for advanced and intuitive tracking algorithms and establish CholecTrack20 as a foundation for developing robust AI-driven surgical assistance systems.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Current validation practice undermines surgical AI development
A consensus-based catalog of 18 validation pitfalls, with evidence that common practices understate uncertainty, hide failures, and flip algorithm rankings in surgical video AI.
-
Current validation practice undermines surgical AI development
A multi-stage Delphi consensus with 92 experts catalogs widespread validation pitfalls in surgical AI video analysis across data, metrics, and reporting, supported by a systematic review and empirical experiments.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.