Rachel, Melnyk, Yuxin, Chen, Tyler, Holler, Nathan, Schuler, Patrick, Saba, Scott, Quarrier, Jonathan, Bloom, William, Tabayoyong, Thomas, Frye, Hani, Rashid, Jean, Joseph, and Ahmed, Ghazi
IRISSeven surgeons randomly reviewed IRIS and CT images of 9 patients with renal masses [5 high complexity (RENAL score ≥ 8), 4 low complexity (≤ 7)]. Surgeons answered a series of questions regarding patient anatomy, perceived difficulty (/100), confidence (/100), and surgical plan. Eye tracking metrics (mean pupil diameter, number of fixations, and gaze duration) were collected.Surgeons spent significantly less time interpreting data from IRIS than CT scans (- 67.1 s, p 0.01) and had higher inter-rater agreement of surgical approach after viewing IRIS (α = 0.16-0.34). After viewing IRIS, surgical plans although not statistically significant demonstrated a greater tendency towards a more selective ischemia approaches which positively correlated with improved identification of vascular anatomy. Planned surgical approach changed in 22/59 of the cases. Compared to viewing the CT scan, left and right mean pupil diameter and number/duration of fixations were significantly lower when using IRIS (p 0.01, p 0.01, p = 0.42, p 0.01, respectively), indicating interpreting information from IRIS required less mental effort despite under-utilizing its interactive features.Surgeons extrapolated more detailed information in less time with less mental effort using IRIS than CT scans and proposed surgical approaches with potential to enhanced surgical outcomes.