Artificial Intelligence in Microsurgical Education: A Systematic Review of Its Role in Training Surgeons

Abstract

Background

Microsurgery is associated with a steep learning curve that requires extensive training through supervised surgeries, cadaver practice, and simulations. The emergence of artificial intelligence (AI) in medical education offers a new potential avenue for microsurgery training by providing real-time feedback, performance analytics, and advanced simulation. This study aims to evaluate the scope, implementation, and outcomes of AI in microsurgical education for trainees across all levels.

Methods

A systematic review was performed in October 2024 following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis with extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. Four databases, including Embase, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science, returned 3,323 citations. Inclusion criteria were studies investigating the use of AI in the medical education of microsurgical trainees. Abstracts, commentaries, editorials, systematic reviews, and non-English studies were excluded. After two-stage screening, a total of 16 studies were included in this review.

Results

The assessed AI interventions appeared in the following number of studies: Computer Vision (n = 13), Sensor-Driven Models (n = 2), Classical/Statistical Machine Learning (n = 4), Task-Specific Neural Networks (n = 4), Transfer Learning of Neural Networks (n = 3), Zero-Shot Inference of Pretrained Models (n = 5), Augmented/Virtual Reality (n = 5), and Anatomical Landmark Tracking (n = 5). Upon full data extraction, three overarching themes were identified among studies: (1) Objective Assessment of Microsurgical Skills, (2) Innovations in Microsurgical Education Materials, and (3) Improvement of Surgeon Workload and Performance. AI improved skill assessment (accuracy: 0.74–0.99), training, and workload optimization. AI-enhanced microsurgical training reduced training time (p = 0.015), improved ergonomics, and minimized cognitive load, accelerating learning (β = 0.86 vs. β = 0.25).

Conclusion

AI has transformative potential in microsurgical education and practice, as emphasized by its capacity to enhance skill assessment, educational tools, and ergonomic support. Despite these enhancements, additional work is needed to address challenges such as data bias, standardization, and real-world implementation.

Keywords

artificial intelligence - microsurgery - education

^* These authors contributed equally to this work.

Publication History

Received: 02 April 2025

Accepted: 27 July 2025

Accepted Manuscript online:
31 July 2025

Article published online:
14 August 2025

• References

• 1 Mohan AT, Saint-Cyr M. Recent advances in microsurgery: an update in the past 4 years. Clin Plast Surg 2020; 47 (04) 663-677
• 2 Milling R, Carolan D, Pafitanis G, Quinlan C, Potter S. Microtools: a systematic review of validated assessment tools in microsurgery. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2022; 75 (11) 4013-4022
• 3 von Reibnitz D, Weinzierl A, Grünherz L, Giovanoli P, Lindenblatt N. Learning curve of robotic assisted microsurgery in surgeons with different skill levels: a prospective preclinical study. J Robot Surg 2024; 18 (01) 353-2
• 4 Zheng Y, Corvi JJ, Paladino JR, Akelina Y. Smoothing the steep microsurgery learning curve: considering alternative suture sizes for early-stage microsurgery training with in vivo rat models. Eur J Plast Surg 2021; 44 (06) 733-737
• 5 Kania K, Chang DK, Abu-Ghname A. et al. Microsurgery training in plastic surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2020; 8 (07) e2898
• 6 Evgeniou E, Walker H, Gujral S. The role of simulation in microsurgical training. J Surg Educ 2018; 75 (01) 171-181
• 7 Helliwell LA, Hyland CJ, Gonte MR. et al. Bias in surgical residency evaluations: a scoping review. J Surg Educ 2023; 80 (07) 922-947
• 8 Chan W, Niranjan N, Ramakrishnan V. Structured assessment of microsurgery skills in the clinical setting. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2010; 63 (08) 1329-1334
• 9 Mueller MA, Pourtaheri N, Evans GRD. Microsurgery training resource variation among US integrated plastic surgery residency programs. J Reconstr Microsurg 2019; 35 (03) 176-181
• 10 Sibomana O. Could virtual reality be a solution in surgical trainings in resource-restricted settings? A perspective. Surg Open Sci 2024; 21: 14-16
• 11 Alaker M, Wynn GR, Arulampalam T. Virtual reality training in laparoscopic surgery: a systematic review & meta-analysis. Int J Surg 2016; 29: 85-94
• 12 Badash I, Burtt K, Solorzano CA, Carey JN. Innovations in surgery simulation: a review of past, current and future techniques. Ann Transl Med 2016; 4 (23) 453
• 13 Vedula SS, Ishii M, Hager GD. Objective assessment of surgical technical skill and competency in the operating room. Annu Rev Biomed Eng 2017; 19: 301-325
• 14 Kanevsky J, Corban J, Gaster R, Kanevsky A, Lin S, Gilardino M. Big data and machine learning in plastic surgery: a new frontier in surgical innovation. Plast Reconstr Surg 2016; 137 (05) 890e-897e
• 15 Jarvis T, Thornburg D, Rebecca AM, Teven CM. Artificial intelligence in plastic surgery: current applications, future directions, and ethical implications. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2020; 8 (10) e3200
• 16 Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. PRISMA Group. Reprint–preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Phys Ther 2009; 89 (09) 873-880
• 17 Babineau J. Product review: covidence (systematic review software). J Can Health Libr Assoc 2014; 35 (02) 68
• 18 Moralejo D, Ogunremi T, Dunn K. Critical appraisal toolkit (CAT) for assessing multiple types of evidence. Can Commun Dis Rep 2017; 43 (09) 176-181
• 19 Barker TH, Habibi N, Aromataris E. et al. The revised JBI critical appraisal tool for the assessment of risk of bias for quasi-experimental studies. JBI Evid Synth 2024; 22 (03) 378-388
• 20 Baghdadi A, Hoshyarmanesh H, de Lotbiniere-Bassett MP, Choi SK, Lama S, Sutherland GR. Data analytics interrogates robotic surgical performance using a microsurgery-specific haptic device. Expert Rev Med Devices 2020; 17 (07) 721-730
• 21 Danilov G, Kostyumov V, Pilipenko O. et al. Computer vision for assessing surgical movements in neurosurgery. Stud Health Technol Inform 2024; 316: 934-938
• 22 Davids J, Makariou SG, Ashrafian H, Darzi A, Marcus HJ, Giannarou S. Automated vision-based microsurgical skill analysis in neurosurgery using deep learning: development and preclinical validation. World Neurosurg 2021; 149: e669-e686
• 23 Deepika P, Deepesh KVV, Vadali PS, Rao M, Vazhayil V, Uppar AM. Computer assisted objective assessment of micro-neurosurgical skills from intraoperative videos. IEEE Open J Eng Med Biol 2023; 4: 11-20
• 24 Gonzalez-Romo NI, Hanalioglu S, Mignucci-Jiménez G, Abramov I, Xu Y, Preul MC. Anatomic depth estimation and 3-dimensional reconstruction of microsurgical anatomy using monoscopic high-definition photogrammetry and machine learning. Oper Neurosurg (Hagerstown) 2023; 24 (04) 432-444
• 25 Handelman A, Keshet Y, Livny E, Barkan R, Nahum Y, Tepper R. Evaluation of suturing performance in general surgery and ocular microsurgery by combining computer vision-based software and distributed fiber optic strain sensors: a proof-of-concept. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 2020; 15 (08) 1359-1367
• 26 Koskinen J, Bednarik R, Vrzakova H, Elomaa AP. Combined gaze metrics as stress-sensitive indicators of microsurgical proficiency. Surg Innov 2020; 27 (06) 614-622
• 27 Krogager ME, Fugleholm K, Poulsgaard L. et al. Intraoperative videogrammetry and photogrammetry for photorealistic neurosurgical 3-dimensional models generated using operative microscope: technical note. Oper Neurosurg (Hagerstown) 2024; 26 (06) 716-726
• 28 Oliveira MM, Quittes L, Costa PHV. et al. Computer vision coaching microsurgical laboratory training: PRIME (Proficiency Index in Microsurgical Education) proof of concept. Neurosurg Rev 2022; 45 (02) 1601-1606
• 29 Sugiyama T, Sugimori H, Tang M. et al. Deep learning-based video-analysis of instrument motion in microvascular anastomosis training. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2024; 166 (01) 6
• 30 Tang M, Sugiyama T, Takahari R. et al. Assessment of changes in vessel area during needle manipulation in microvascular anastomosis using a deep learning-based semantic segmentation algorithm: a pilot study. Neurosurg Rev 2024; 47 (01) 200
• 31 Ulbrich M, Van den Bosch V, Bönsch A. et al. Advantages of a training course for surgical planning in virtual reality for oral and maxillofacial surgery: crossover study. JMIR Serious Games 2023; 11 (01) e40541
• 32 Xiang N, Liang H, Yu L. et al. A mixed reality framework for microsurgery simulation with visual-tactile perception. Vis Comput 2023; 39 (08) 3661-3673
• 33 Xu J, Anastasiou D, Booker J. et al. A deep learning approach to classify surgical skill in microsurgery using force data from a novel sensorised surgical glove. Sensors (Basel) 2023; 23 (21) 8947
• 34 Xu A, Yao Y, Chen W. et al. Comparing the impact of three-dimensional digital visualization technology versus traditional microscopy on microsurgeons in microsurgery: a prospective self-controlled study. Int J Surg 2024; 110 (03) 1337-1346
• 35 Zhang D, Wu Z, Chen J. et al. Automatic microsurgical skill assessment based on cross-domain transfer learning. IEEE Robot Autom Lett 2020; 5 (03) 4148-4155
• 36 Bridgewater B, Grayson AD, Jackson M. et al; North West Quality Improvement Programme in Cardiac Interventions. Surgeon specific mortality in adult cardiac surgery: comparison between crude and risk stratified data. BMJ 2003; 327 (7405): 13-17
• 37 Aghazadeh MA, Jayaratna IS, Hung AJ. et al. External validation of global evaluative assessment of robotic skills (GEARS). Surg Endosc 2015; 29 (11) 3261-3266
• 38 Sorouri K, Khan S, Bowden S, Searle S, Carr L, Simpson JS. The glaring gender bias in the operating room: a qualitative study of factors influencing career selection for first-year medical students. J Surg Educ 2021; 78 (05) 1516-1523
• 39 Simonyan K, Zisserman A. Very deep convolutional networks for large-scale image recognition. arXiv.org. April 10, 2015. https://arxiv.org/abs/1409.1556
• 40 Lynn JV, Best CSW, Berlin NL, Kung TA. A microsurgical skills curriculum to develop unconscious competence. J Reconstr Microsurg 2025; 41 (04) 312-317
• 41 Joy MT, Applebaum MA, Anderson WM, Serletti JM, Capito AE. Impact of high-fidelity microvascular surgery simulation on resident training. J Reconstr Microsurg 2024; 40 (03) 211-216
• 42 Nicholson DT, Chalk C, Funnell WRJ, Daniel SJ. Can virtual reality improve anatomy education? A randomised controlled study of a computer-generated three-dimensional anatomical ear model. Med Educ 2006; 40 (11) 1081-1087
• 43 Sullivan J, Skladman R, Varagur K. et al. From augmented to virtual reality in plastic surgery: blazing the trail to a new frontier. J Reconstr Microsurg 2024; 40 (05) 398-406
• 44 Seymour NE, Gallagher AG, Roman SA. et al. Virtual reality training improves operating room performance: results of a randomized, double-blinded study. Ann Surg 2002; 236 (04) 458-463 , discussion 463–464
• 45 de Jager E, Levine AA, Udyavar NR. et al. Disparities in surgical access: a systematic literature review, conceptual model, and evidence map. J Am Coll Surg 2019; 228 (03) 276-298
• 46 Please H, Narang K, Bolton W. et al. Virtual reality technology for surgical learning: qualitative outcomes of the first virtual reality training course for emergency and essential surgery delivered by a UK-Uganda partnership. BMJ Open Qual 2024; 13 (01) e002477
• 47 Chauhan R, Ingersol C, Wooden WA. et al. Fundamentals of microsurgery: a novel simulation curriculum based on validated laparoscopic education approaches. J Reconstr Microsurg 2023; 39 (07) 517-525
• 48 Pottle J. Virtual reality and the transformation of medical education. Future Healthc J 2019; 6 (03) 181-185
• 49 Mabrey JD, Reinig KD, Cannon WD. Virtual reality in orthopaedics: is it a reality?. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2010; 468 (10) 2586-2591
• 50 Guillaume VGJ, Ammo T, Leypold S. et al. Comparison of biomechanical and histopathological properties of robot-assisted anastomoses using the Symani Surgical System versus conventional anastomoses in a preclinical microsurgical model. J Reconstr Microsurg 2025
• 51 Lakhiani C, Fisher SM, Janhofer DE, Song DH. Ergonomics in microsurgery. J Surg Oncol 2018; 118 (05) 840-844
• 52 Davis WT, Fletcher SA, Guillamondegui OD. Musculoskeletal occupational injury among surgeons: effects for patients, providers, and institutions. J Surg Res 2014; 189 (02) 207-212.e6
• 53 Norori N, Hu Q, Aellen FM, Faraci FD, Tzovara A. Addressing bias in big data and AI for health care: a call for open science. Patterns (N Y) 2021; 2 (10) 100347
• 54 Finkelstein ER, Samaha Y, Harris A. et al. Microsurgery education among U.S. plastic surgery residency programs. J Reconstr Microsurg 2025
• 55 Wu C, Xu H, Bai D, Chen X, Gao J, Jiang X. Public perceptions on the application of artificial intelligence in healthcare: a qualitative meta-synthesis. BMJ Open 2023; 13 (01) e066322
• 56 Abbas MY, Haas J, Huang E. et al. Feedback and assessment methods in microsurgery education: a scoping review. J Reconstr Microsurg 2025