BACKGROUND: Surgical resection is the only potentially curative treatment for patients with colorectal, liver, and pancreatic cancers. Although these procedures are performed with low mortality, rates of complications remain relatively high following hepatopancreatic and colorectal surgery. METHODS: The American College of Surgeons (ACS) National Surgical Quality Improvement Program was utilized to identify patients undergoing liver, pancreatic and colorectal surgery from 2014 to 2016. Decision tree models were utilized to predict the occurrence of any complication, as well as specific complications. To assess the variability of the performance of the classification trees, bootstrapping was performed on 50% of the sample. RESULTS: Algorithms were derived from a total of 15,657 patients who met inclusion criteria. The algorithm had a good predictive ability for the occurrence of any complication, with a C-statistic of 0.74, outperforming the ASA (C-statistic 0.58) and ACS-Surgical Risk Calculator (C-statistic 0.71). The algorithm was able to predict with high accuracy thirteen out of the seventeen complications analyzed. The best performance was in the prediction of stroke (C-statistic 0.98), followed by wound dehiscence, cardiac arrest, and progressive renal failure (all C-statistic 0.96). The algorithm had a good predictive ability for superficial SSI (C-statistic 0.76), organ space SSI (C-statistic 0.76), sepsis (C-statistic 0.79), and bleeding requiring transfusion (C-statistic 0.79). CONCLUSION: Machine learning was used to develop an algorithm that accurately predicted patient risk of developing complications following liver, pancreatic, or colorectal surgery. The algorithm had very good predictive ability to predict specific complications and demonstrated superiority over other established methods.
BACKGROUND: Surgical resection is the only potentially curative treatment for patients with colorectal, liver, and pancreatic cancers. Although these procedures are performed with low mortality, rates of complications remain relatively high following hepatopancreatic and colorectal surgery. METHODS: The American College of Surgeons (ACS) National Surgical Quality Improvement Program was utilized to identify patients undergoing liver, pancreatic and colorectal surgery from 2014 to 2016. Decision tree models were utilized to predict the occurrence of any complication, as well as specific complications. To assess the variability of the performance of the classification trees, bootstrapping was performed on 50% of the sample. RESULTS: Algorithms were derived from a total of 15,657 patients who met inclusion criteria. The algorithm had a good predictive ability for the occurrence of any complication, with a C-statistic of 0.74, outperforming the ASA (C-statistic 0.58) and ACS-Surgical Risk Calculator (C-statistic 0.71). The algorithm was able to predict with high accuracy thirteen out of the seventeen complications analyzed. The best performance was in the prediction of stroke (C-statistic 0.98), followed by wound dehiscence, cardiac arrest, and progressive renal failure (all C-statistic 0.96). The algorithm had a good predictive ability for superficial SSI (C-statistic 0.76), organ space SSI (C-statistic 0.76), sepsis (C-statistic 0.79), and bleeding requiring transfusion (C-statistic 0.79). CONCLUSION: Machine learning was used to develop an algorithm that accurately predicted patient risk of developing complications following liver, pancreatic, or colorectal surgery. The algorithm had very good predictive ability to predict specific complications and demonstrated superiority over other established methods.
Authors: Gaya Spolverato; Mohammad Y Yakoob; Yuhree Kim; Sorin Alexandrescu; Hugo P Marques; Jorge Lamelas; Luca Aldrighetti; T Clark Gamblin; Shishir K Maithel; Carlo Pulitano; Todd W Bauer; Feng Shen; George A Poultsides; J Wallis Marsh; Timothy M Pawlik Journal: Cancer Date: 2015-04-22 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Jeffrey H Silber; Paul R Rosenbaum; Martha E Trudeau; Wei Chen; Xuemei Zhang; Rachel Rapaport Kelz; Rachel E Mosher; Orit Even-Shoshan Journal: Med Care Date: 2005-02 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Vivian Hsiao; Dawn M Elfenbein; Susan C Pitt; Kristin L Long; Rebecca S Sippel; David F Schneider Journal: J Surg Res Date: 2021-12-10 Impact factor: 2.192
Authors: Dmytro Onishchenko; Daniel S Rubin; James R van Horne; R Parker Ward; Ishanu Chattopadhyay Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2022-07-29 Impact factor: 6.106
Authors: V Lin; A Tsouchnika; E Allakhverdiiev; A W Rosen; M Gögenur; J S R Clausen; K B Bräuner; J S Walbech; P Rijnbeek; I Drakos; I Gögenur Journal: Tech Coloproctol Date: 2022-05-20 Impact factor: 3.699
Authors: Yue Yu; Chi Peng; Zhiyuan Zhang; Kejia Shen; Yufeng Zhang; Jian Xiao; Wang Xi; Pei Wang; Jin Rao; Zhichao Jin; Zhinong Wang Journal: Front Cardiovasc Med Date: 2022-05-03
Authors: Kevin A Chen; Matthew E Berginski; Chirag S Desai; Jose G Guillem; Jonathan Stem; Shawn M Gomez; Muneera R Kapadia Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2022-05-04 Impact factor: 3.267