Literature DB >> 31383411

Construct validation of machine learning in the prediction of short-term postoperative complications following total shoulder arthroplasty.

Anirudh K Gowd1, Avinesh Agarwalla2, Nirav H Amin3, Anthony A Romeo4, Gregory P Nicholson5, Nikhil N Verma5, Joseph N Liu6.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: We aimed to demonstrate that supervised machine learning (ML) models can better predict postoperative complications after total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) than comorbidity indices.
METHODS: The American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was queried from 2005-2017 for TSA cases. Training and validation sets were created by randomly assigning 80% and 20% of the data set. Included variables were age, body mass index (BMI), operative time, smoking status, comorbidities, diagnosis, and preoperative hematocrit and albumin. Complications included any adverse event, transfusion, extended length of stay (>3 days), surgical site infection, return to the operating room, deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism, and readmission. Each SML algorithm was compared with one another and to a baseline model using American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification. Model strength was evaluated by calculating the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and the positive predictive value (PPV) of complications.
RESULTS: We identified a total of 17,119 TSA cases. Mean age, BMI, and length of stay were 69.5 ± 9.6 years, 31.1 ± 6.8, and 2.0 ± 2.2 days. Percentage hematocrit, BMI, and operative time were of highest importance in outcome prediction. SML algorithms outperformed ASA classification models for predicting any adverse event (71.0% vs. 63.0%), transfusion (77.0% vs. 64.0%), extended length of stay (68.0% vs. 60.0%), surgical site infection (65.0% vs. 58.0%), return to the operating room (59.0% vs. 54.0%), and readmission (64.0% vs. 58.0%). SML algorithms demonstrated the greatest PPV for any adverse event (62.5%), extended length of stay (61.4%), transfusion (52.2%), and readmission (10.1%). ASA classification had a 0.0% PPV for complications.
CONCLUSION: With continued validation, intelligent models could calculate patient-specific risk for complications to adjust perioperative care and site of surgery.
Copyright © 2019 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Total shoulder arthroplasty; anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty; complication rate; machine learning; neural networks; reverse total shoulder arthroplasty; risk assessment

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31383411     DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2019.05.017

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg        ISSN: 1058-2746            Impact factor:   3.019


  7 in total

Review 1.  Artificial intelligence in spine care: current applications and future utility.

Authors:  Alexander L Hornung; Christopher M Hornung; G Michael Mallow; J Nicolás Barajas; Augustus Rush; Arash J Sayari; Fabio Galbusera; Hans-Joachim Wilke; Matthew Colman; Frank M Phillips; Howard S An; Dino Samartzis
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2022-03-27       Impact factor: 2.721

2.  Development of a Machine Learning Algorithm for Prediction of Complications and Unplanned Readmission Following Primary Anatomic Total Shoulder Replacements.

Authors:  Sai K Devana; Akash A Shah; Changhee Lee; Andrew R Jensen; Edward Cheung; Mihaela van der Schaar; Nelson F SooHoo
Journal:  J Shoulder Elb Arthroplast       Date:  2022-04-19

3.  Can Machine-learning Algorithms Predict Early Revision TKA in the Danish Knee Arthroplasty Registry?

Authors:  Anders El-Galaly; Clare Grazal; Andreas Kappel; Poul Torben Nielsen; Steen Lund Jensen; Jonathan A Forsberg
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2020-09       Impact factor: 4.755

4.  Machine learning prediction of postoperative unplanned 30-day hospital readmission in older adult.

Authors:  Linji Li; Linna Wang; Li Lu; Tao Zhu
Journal:  Front Mol Biosci       Date:  2022-08-10

5.  What Is the Accuracy of Three Different Machine Learning Techniques to Predict Clinical Outcomes After Shoulder Arthroplasty?

Authors:  Vikas Kumar; Christopher Roche; Steven Overman; Ryan Simovitch; Pierre-Henri Flurin; Thomas Wright; Joseph Zuckerman; Howard Routman; Ankur Teredesai
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2020-10       Impact factor: 4.755

6.  Application of the Preoperative Assistant System Based on Machine Learning in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Resection.

Authors:  Shouyun Lv; Shizong Li; Zhiwei Yu; Kaiqiong Wang; Xin Qiao; Dongwei Gong; Changxiong Wu
Journal:  J Healthc Eng       Date:  2021-09-24       Impact factor: 2.682

7.  Development of a Machine Learning Algorithm for Prediction of Complications and Unplanned Readmission Following Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty.

Authors:  Sai K Devana; Akash A Shah; Changhee Lee; Varun Gudapati; Andrew R Jensen; Edward Cheung; Carlos Solorzano; Mihaela van der Schaar; Nelson F SooHoo
Journal:  J Shoulder Elb Arthroplast       Date:  2021-10-28
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.