Advertisement

Toward knowledge-based liver surgery: holistic information processing for surgical decision support

  • K. MärzEmail author
  • M. Hafezi
  • T. Weller
  • A. Saffari
  • M. Nolden
  • N. Fard
  • A. Majlesara
  • S. Zelzer
  • M. Maleshkova
  • M. Volovyk
  • N. Gharabaghi
  • M. Wagner
  • G. Emami
  • S. Engelhardt
  • A. Fetzer
  • H. Kenngott
  • N. Rezai
  • A. Rettinger
  • R. Studer
  • A. Mehrabi
  • L. Maier-Hein
Original Article

Abstract

Purpose

Malignant neoplasms of the liver are among the most frequent cancers worldwide. Given the diversity of options for liver cancer therapy, the choice of treatment depends on various parameters including patient condition, tumor size and location, liver function, and previous interventions. To address this issue, we present the first approach to treatment strategy planning based on holistic processing of patient-individual data, practical knowledge (i.e., case knowledge), and factual knowledge (e.g., clinical guidelines and studies).

Methods

The contributions of this paper are as follows: (1) a formalized dynamic patient model that incorporates all the heterogeneous data acquired for a specific patient in the whole course of disease treatment; (2) a concept for formalizing factual knowledge; and (3) a technical infrastructure that enables storing, accessing, and processing of heterogeneous data to support clinical decision making.

Results

Our patient model, which currently covers 602 patient-individual parameters, was successfully instantiated for 184 patients. It was sufficiently comprehensive to serve as the basis for the formalization of a total of 72 rules extracted from studies on patients with colorectal liver metastases or hepatocellular carcinoma. For a subset of 70 patients with these diagnoses, the system derived an average of \(37 \pm 15\) assertions per patient.

Conclusion

The proposed concept paves the way for holistic treatment strategy planning by enabling joint storing and processing of heterogeneous data from various information sources.

Keywords

Cognition Decision support Ontology Liver cancer Computer-assisted intervention Treatment planning 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was carried out with the support of the German Research Foundation (DFG) as part of project A02, I01, and S01, SFB/TRR 125 Cognition-Guided Surgery, with additional support from the projects A01 and B01. All of the authors state no conflict of interests. All studies have been approved and performed in accordance with ethical standards. Patient data were gathered and evaluated under informed consent only.

References

  1. 1.
    Ananthakrishnan A, Gogineni V, Saeian K (2006) Epidemiology of primary and secondary liver cancers. Semin Intervent Radiol 23(1):47–63CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Beller S, Hunerbein M, Eulenstein S, Lange T, Schlag PM (2007) Feasibility of navigated resection of liver tumors using multiplanar visualization of intraoperative 3-dimensional ultrasound data. Ann Surg 246(2):288–294CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bosch FX, Ribes J, Daz M, Clries R (2004) Primary liver cancer: worldwide incidence and trends. Gastroenterology 127(5, Supplement 1):S5–S16CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chen RC, Huang YH, Bau CT, Chen SM (2012) A recommendation system based on domain ontology and SWRL for anti-diabetic drugs selection. Expert Syst Appl 39(4):3995–4006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Choti MA, Sitzmann JV, Tiburi MF, Sumetchotimetha W, Rangsin R, Schulick RD, Lillemoe KD, Yeo CJ, Cameron JL (2002) Trends in long-term survival following liver resection for hepatic colorectal metastases. Ann Surg 235(6):759–766CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    de Clercq P, Kaiser K, Hasman A (2008) Computer-interpretable guideline formalisms. Stud Health Technol Inform 139:22–43PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Drechsler K, Oyarzun Laura C, Wesarg S (2012) Interventional planning of liver resections: an overview. In: Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC), 2012 annual international conference of the IEEE. IEEE, pp 3744–3747Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dugas M, Schauer R, Volk A, Rau H (2002) Interactive decision support in hepatic surgery. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2(1):5CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gores GJ (2009) HEPATOLOGY: a home for hepatocellular cancer publications. Hepatology 50(1):1–2CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hansen C, Zidowitz S, Ritter F, Lange C, Oldhafer K, Hahn HK (2013) Risk maps for liver surgery. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 8(3):419–428CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Konukoglu E, Glocker B, Zikic D, Criminisi A (2013) Neighbourhood approximation using randomized forests. Med Image Anal 17(7):790–804CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mise Y, Tani K, Aoki T, Sakamoto Y, Hasegawa K, Sugawara Y, Kokudo N (2013) Virtual liver resection: computer-assisted operation planning using a three-dimensional liver representation. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci 20(2):157–164CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Peterhans M, vom Berg A, Dagon B, Inderbitzin D, Baur C, Candinas D, Weber S (2011) A navigation system for open liver surgery: design, workflow and first clinical applications. Int J Med Robotics Comput Assist Surg 7(1):7–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sun J, Wang F, Hu J, Edabollahi S (2012) Supervised patient similarity measure of heterogeneous patient records. ACM SIGKDD Explor Newsl 14(1):16–24Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Tomlinson JS, Jarnagin WR, DeMatteo RP, Fong Y, Kornprat P, Gonen M, Kemeny N, Brennan MF, Blumgart LH, D’Angelica M (2007) Actual 10-year survival after resection of colorectal liver metastases defines cure. JCO 25(29):4575–4580Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wang HQ, Zhou TS, Tian LL, Qian YM, Li JS (2014) Creating hospital-specific customized clinical pathways by applying semantic reasoning to clinical data. J Biomed InformGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yang X, Lee W, Choi Y, You H (2012) Development of a user-centered virtual liver surgery planning system. Proc Hum Fact Ergon Soc Annu Meet 56(1):772–776CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© CARS 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • K. März
    • 1
    Email author
  • M. Hafezi
    • 2
  • T. Weller
    • 3
  • A. Saffari
    • 2
  • M. Nolden
    • 1
  • N. Fard
    • 2
  • A. Majlesara
    • 2
  • S. Zelzer
    • 1
  • M. Maleshkova
    • 3
  • M. Volovyk
    • 3
  • N. Gharabaghi
    • 2
  • M. Wagner
    • 2
  • G. Emami
    • 2
  • S. Engelhardt
    • 1
  • A. Fetzer
    • 1
  • H. Kenngott
    • 2
  • N. Rezai
    • 2
  • A. Rettinger
    • 3
  • R. Studer
    • 3
  • A. Mehrabi
    • 2
  • L. Maier-Hein
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Medical and Biological InformaticsGerman Cancer Research CenterHeidelbergGermany
  2. 2.Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation SurgeryUniversity of HeidelbergHeidelbergGermany
  3. 3.Institute of Applied Informatics and Formal Description Methods, KITKarlsruheGermany

Personalised recommendations