ClinicalTrials.gg
Not yet recruitingNCT07915206Updated Nov 4, 2026

Evaluation of Large Language Models in Parasternal Block Ultrasound Interpretation

An observational study in Parasternal Block, sponsored by Kanuni Sultan Suleyman Training and Research Hospital. Not yet recruiting at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye). Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-11-04.

Sponsored by Kanuni Sultan Suleyman Training and Research Hospital · Observational

Updated Nov 4, 2026Newly registeredGo to Updates ↓
Study type
Observational
Model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
32
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

This prospective observational study aims to evaluate the accuracy of multimodal large language models (LLMs) in interpreting ultrasound recordings of superficial and deep parasternal intercostal plane blocks.

Ultrasound recordings obtained during routine regional anesthesia procedures will be independently evaluated by LLMs using standardized prompts. Their ability to identify anatomical structures, assess local anesthetic spread, determine block success, and recognize potential procedural risks will be compared with expert anesthesiologist assessments.

The study aims to investigate the potential role of LLMs in ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia assessment and clinical decision support.

Read the detailed description

Study Design and Participants This prospective observational study will evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of multimodal large language models (LLMs) in interpreting ultrasound recordings of superficial and deep parasternal intercostal plane blocks (S-PIP and D-PIP).

The study will include 32 adult patients aged 18-85 years, classified as American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I-III, undergoing elective surgery with an ultrasound-guided parasternal intercostal plane block.

Blocks will be performed by experienced anesthesiologists as part of routine clinical practice. Ultrasound recordings will include the local anesthetic injection and its spread within the targeted fascial plane. No additional procedures will be performed for research purposes.

Ultrasound Video Acquisition Ultrasound-guided S-PIP and D-PIP procedures will be recorded in video format, including the injection process.

Videos with inadequate visualization of relevant anatomical structures, needle placement, or local anesthetic spread will be excluded.

All recordings will be anonymized before evaluation. Each eligible recording will be assigned a unique identification code.

Large Language Model Evaluation ChatGPT (OpenAI) and Gemini (Google) will be evaluated using their latest available multimodal versions at the time of assessment. Exact model names, versions, access platforms, and evaluation dates will be documented.

The same ultrasound recording will be independently submitted to both models in MP4 format, provided that direct video analysis is supported by the selected model interfaces.

An identical standardized English-language prompt will be used for every recording and both LLMs. Each recording will be evaluated in a separate conversation to minimize contextual carryover.

Models will receive no patient-identifying information, expert interpretations, or feedback regarding the correctness of their responses.

The following eight questions will be presented in the same order:

  1. Identify the anatomical structures visible in this parasternal ultrasound recording.
  2. Based on the observed local anesthetic spread, determine whether the solution was deposited in the correct target fascial plane.
  3. Determine whether the local anesthetic spread is superficial or deep.
  4. If the observed spread is inadequate or occurs outside the target fascial plane, what corrective action would you recommend?
  5. Assess whether the needle tip is positioned within the appropriate fascial plane.
  6. Identify potential procedural risks involving adjacent structures, including the pericardium and internal mammary vessels.
  7. Which dermatomal levels are expected to be covered by this block?
  8. If the observed spread is inadequate or occurs outside the target fascial plane, would you recommend an additional injection? Models will be instructed to base their assessments exclusively on the provided ultrasound recording and to explicitly indicate when the available visual information is insufficient for a reliable conclusion.

Responses will be recorded without additional prompting or correction. Response time and other predefined performance parameters will also be documented.

Expert Assessment and Blinding Two experienced anesthesiology professors will participate in the expert assessment process. The first expert (Expert A) will independently review each ultrasound recording and answer the same eight standardized questions. These assessments will serve as the expert reference. LLM-generated responses and Expert A's responses will subsequently be anonymized and randomly coded to conceal their sources.

The second expert (Expert B), blinded to response origin, will independently evaluate the anonymized responses regarding their accuracy, clinical appropriateness, and agreement with the expert reference.

Responses will be assessed using predefined scoring criteria, including content similarity and an overall quality score ranging from 0 to 10.

Outcome Assessment The primary objective is to compare the diagnostic accuracy of ChatGPT and Gemini in identifying anatomical structures and determining whether the local anesthetic solution was correctly deposited within the intended fascial plane during parasternal intercostal plane blocks.

Secondary assessments will include classification of superficial versus deep local anesthetic spread, needle tip position, procedural risk identification, appropriateness of clinical recommendations, predicted dermatomal coverage, and agreement with expert assessments. Model response time, response quality, and reported confidence will also be evaluated.

Data Protection and Clinical Safety All recordings will be de-identified before submission to the LLM platforms. Model-generated interpretations will be used solely for research purposes and will not influence clinical decision-making or patient management.

The study will be conducted in accordance with the approved research protocol and applicable ethical and data protection requirements.

02

Conditions studied

  • Parasternal Block
03

In context

Lead sponsor

Kanuni Sultan Suleyman Training and Research Hospital is the lead sponsor of 224 studies on the registry; 34 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No
Sampling method
Probability sample

Study population

32

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Patients aged 18-85 years.
  • American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I-III.
  • Undergoing elective surgery with an ultrasound-guided superficial or deep parasternal intercostal plane block.
  • Complete ultrasound video recording of local anesthetic injection.
  • Written informed consent for study participation.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Technical failure during block performance.
  • Inadequate ultrasound recording quality preventing clear visualization of the needle tip or local anesthetic spread.
  • Missing demographic data.
  • Withdrawal of informed consent at any stage of the study.
05

Study design

Observational model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
32 participants (estimated)
Patient registry
No

Groups and cohorts

  • Patients Undergoing Parasternal Intercostal Plane Blocks

    Adult patients undergoing ultrasound-guided superficial or deep parasternal intercostal plane blocks as part of routine clinical care. Anonymized ultrasound recordings of local anesthetic injection will be independently evaluated by ChatGPT and Gemini using identical standardized prompts. Model assessments will be compared with expert anesthesiologist evaluations.

    Diagnostic Test: Multimodal Large Language Model-Based Ultrasound Assessment

Interventions

  • Diagnostic testMultimodal Large Language Model-Based Ultrasound Assessment

    Anonymized ultrasound recordings of parasternal intercostal plane blocks will be independently evaluated using the latest available multimodal versions of ChatGPT and Gemini. Both models will receive the same MP4 recordings and identical standardized prompts to assess anatomical structures, correct deposition of local anesthetic solution within the target fascial plane, injection spread, and potential procedural risks. Responses will be compared with expert anesthesiologist assessments. No AI-generated recommendations will influence patient care.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Correct Local Anesthetic Deposition

    The accuracy of ChatGPT and Gemini in determining whether the local anesthetic solution was deposited within the intended fascial plane will be evaluated using ultrasound recordings. Model assessments will be compared with the expert reference assessment. Accuracy will be calculated as the percentage of correctly classified recordings.

    Time frame: During the ultrasound-guided block procedure

Secondary outcomes

  1. Anatomical Identification Accuracy

    The ability of ChatGPT and Gemini to correctly identify anatomical structures visible in parasternal intercostal plane block ultrasound recordings will be evaluated against expert anesthesiologist assessments. Anatomical identification performance will be scored using predefined criteria.

    Time frame: During the ultrasound-guided block procedure

  2. Needle Tip Position

    The accuracy of ChatGPT and Gemini in determining whether the needle tip is located within the intended fascial plane will be compared with the expert reference assessment. Results will be reported as the percentage of correctly classified recordings.

    Time frame: During the ultrasound-guided block procedure

  3. Local Anesthetic Spread

    The ability of each model to classify local anesthetic spread as superficial or deep and identify the observed spread pattern will be compared with expert assessments. Classification accuracy will be reported as a percentage.

    Time frame: During the ultrasound-guided block procedure

  4. Procedural Risk Identification

    The ability of each model to identify potential procedural risks involving adjacent anatomical structures, including the internal mammary vessels and pericardium, will be evaluated against expert assessments. Accuracy will be reported as the percentage of correctly classified recordings.

    Time frame: During the ultrasound-guided block procedure

  5. Clinical Recommendation Quality

    The appropriateness of recommendations regarding inadequate local anesthetic spread, corrective actions, and additional injection will be assessed by an independent expert anesthesiologist using a predefined scoring system ranging from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating greater clinical appropriateness.

    Time frame: During the ultrasound-guided block procedure

  6. Agreement With Expert Assessment

    Agreement between ChatGPT, Gemini, and expert anesthesiologist assessments will be evaluated for predefined ultrasound interpretation parameters. Agreement will be quantified using Cohen's kappa for applicable categorical assessments.

    Time frame: During the ultrasound-guided block procedure

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Health Science University İstanbul Kanuni Sultan Süleyman Education and Training Hospital
    Istanbul, 34303, Turkey (Türkiye)
    + New studies here

    Other open studies at Health Science University İstanbul Kanuni Sultan Süleyman Education and Training Hospital, Istanbul

    Open a list, then choose Watch this search to get new studies there in a weekly email.

08

Timeline

1 registry update since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reached

Start is estimated for Nov 2026; primary completion for Apr 2027, 5 months later.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Oct 29, 2026
First posted
Nov 4, 2026
StartEst.
Nov 2, 2026
Primary completionEst.
Apr 2, 2027
CompletionEst.
Apr 3, 2027
Last update
Nov 4, 2026
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
Registered
First appeared on the registry. No changes since
Nov 4, 2026
Show all 1 update
  1. Nov 4, 2026
    First appeared on the registry

From the registry record's own update history. This site started tracking changes on Sep 25, 2026; for anything earlier, see the record history on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

09

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT07915206
Responsible party
Engin Ihsan Turan (Associated Professor, Kanuni Sultan Suleyman Training and Research Hospital) — Principal investigator
First posted
Nov 4, 2026
Start date
Nov 2, 2026 (estimated)
Primary completion
Apr 2, 2027 (estimated)
Completion
Apr 3, 2027 (estimated)
Last update
Nov 4, 2026

Study contacts

Engin ihsan Turan, principal investigator
Contact
enginihsan@hotmail.com
+9005382431114

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in Oct 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion