Literature DB >> 29191094

Potential of predictive computer models for preoperative patient selection to enhance overall quality-adjusted life years gained at 2-year follow-up: a simulation in 234 patients with adult spinal deformity.

Taemin Oh1, Justin K Scheer2, Justin S Smith3, Richard Hostin4, Chessie Robinson5, Jeffrey L Gum6, Frank Schwab7, Robert A Hart8, Virginie Lafage7, Douglas C Burton9, Shay Bess10, Themistocles Protopsaltis7, Eric O Klineberg11, Christopher I Shaffrey3, Christopher P Ames1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE Patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD) experience significant quality of life improvements after surgery. Treatment, however, is expensive and complication rates are high. Predictive analytics has the potential to use many variables to make accurate predictions in large data sets. A validated minimum clinically important difference (MCID) model has the potential to assist in patient selection, thereby improving outcomes and, potentially, cost-effectiveness. METHODS The present study was a retrospective analysis of a multiinstitutional database of patients with ASD. Inclusion criteria were as follows: age ≥ 18 years, radiographic evidence of ASD, 2-year follow-up, and preoperative Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) > 15. Forty-six variables were used for model training: demographic data, radiographic parameters, surgical variables, and results on the health-related quality of life questionnaire. Patients were grouped as reaching a 2-year ODI MCID (+MCID) or not (-MCID). An ensemble of 5 different bootstrapped decision trees was constructed using the C5.0 algorithm. Internal validation was performed via 70:30 data split for training/testing. Model accuracy and area under the curve (AUC) were calculated. The mean quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and QALYs gained at 2 years were calculated and discounted at 3.5% per year. The QALYs were compared between patients in the +MCID and -MCID groups. RESULTS A total of 234 patients met inclusion criteria (+MCID 129, -MCID 105). Sixty-nine patients (29.5%) were included for model testing. Predicted versus actual results were 50 versus 40 for +MCID and 19 versus 29 for -MCID (i.e., 10 patients were misclassified). Model accuracy was 85.5%, with 0.96 AUC. Predicted results showed that patients in the +MCID group had significantly greater 2-year mean QALYs (p = 0.0057) and QALYs gained (p = 0.0002). CONCLUSIONS A successful model with 85.5% accuracy and 0.96 AUC was constructed to predict which patients would reach ODI MCID. The patients in the +MCID group had significantly higher mean 2-year QALYs and QALYs gained. This study provides proof of concept for using predictive modeling techniques to optimize patient selection in complex spine surgery.

Entities:  

Keywords:  ASD = adult spinal deformity; AUC = area under the curve; BMI = body mass index; HRQOL = health-related QOL; IBF = interbody fusion; LIV = lowermost instrumented vertebra; MCID = minimum clinically important difference; NRS = numerical rating scale; ODI = Oswestry Disability Index; Oswestry Disability Index; QALY = quality-adjusted life year; QOL = quality of life; SF-36 = 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey; SPO = Smith-Petersen osteotomy; SRS = Scoliosis Research Society; UIV = uppermost instrumented vertebra; minimum clinically important difference; predictive modeling; quality-adjusted life year

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29191094     DOI: 10.3171/2017.9.FOCUS17494

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neurosurg Focus        ISSN: 1092-0684            Impact factor:   4.047


  9 in total

Review 1.  Artificial intelligence in spine surgery.

Authors:  Ahmed Benzakour; Pavlos Altsitzioglou; Jean Michel Lemée; Alaaeldin Ahmad; Andreas F Mavrogenis; Thami Benzakour
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2022-07-29       Impact factor: 3.479

Review 2.  Artificial Intelligence-Driven Prediction Modeling and Decision Making in Spine Surgery Using Hybrid Machine Learning Models.

Authors:  Babak Saravi; Frank Hassel; Sara Ülkümen; Alisia Zink; Veronika Shavlokhova; Sebastien Couillard-Despres; Martin Boeker; Peter Obid; Gernot Michael Lang
Journal:  J Pers Med       Date:  2022-03-22

3.  Narrative Review of Predictive Analytics of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery.

Authors:  Kurt Lehner; Jeff Ehresman; Zach Pennington; A Karim Ahmed; Daniel Lubelski; Daniel M Sciubba
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2020-10-09

Review 4.  A narrative review of machine learning as promising revolution in clinical practice of scoliosis.

Authors:  Kai Chen; Xiao Zhai; Kaiqiang Sun; Haojue Wang; Changwei Yang; Ming Li
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2021-01

5.  Feasibility and Assessment of a Machine Learning-Based Predictive Model of Outcome After Lumbar Decompression Surgery.

Authors:  Arthur André; Bruno Peyrou; Alexandre Carpentier; Jean-Jacques Vignaux
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2020-11-19

Review 6.  State-of-the-art reviews predictive modeling in adult spinal deformity: applications of advanced analytics.

Authors:  Rushikesh S Joshi; Darryl Lau; Justin K Scheer; Miquel Serra-Burriel; Alba Vila-Casademunt; Shay Bess; Justin S Smith; Ferran Pellise; Christopher P Ames
Journal:  Spine Deform       Date:  2021-05-18

7.  Generative models: an upcoming innovation in musculoskeletal radiology? A preliminary test in spine imaging.

Authors:  Fabio Galbusera; Tito Bassani; Gloria Casaroli; Salvatore Gitto; Edoardo Zanchetta; Francesco Costa; Luca Maria Sconfienza
Journal:  Eur Radiol Exp       Date:  2018-10-31

8.  Predictive Analytics in Spine Oncology Research: First Steps, Limitations, and Future Directions.

Authors:  Elie Massaad; Nida Fatima; Muhamed Hadzipasic; Christopher Alvarez-Breckenridge; Ganesh M Shankar; John H Shin
Journal:  Neurospine       Date:  2019-12-31

9.  Artificial Intelligence for Adult Spinal Deformity.

Authors:  Rushikesh S Joshi; Alexander F Haddad; Darryl Lau; Christopher P Ames
Journal:  Neurospine       Date:  2019-12-31
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.