Optimal inputs for machine learning models in predicting total joint arthroplasty outcomes: a systematic review

被引:0
|
作者
Sanghvi, Parshva A. [1 ]
Shah, Aakash K. [1 ]
Hecht, Christian J. [1 ]
Karimi, Amir H. [1 ]
Kamath, Atul F. [1 ]
机构
[1] Inst Cleveland Clin Fdn, Orthopaed & Rheumatol Inst, Ctr Hip Preservat, Dept Orthopaed Surg, Mail code A41, 9500 Euclid Ave, Cleveland, OH 44195 USA
关键词
Machine learning; Total joint arthroplasty; Outcome prediction; PRIMARY TOTAL HIP; ALGORITHMS; DEPRESSION; REVISION;
D O I
10.1007/s00590-024-04076-5
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
IntroductionMachine learning (ML) models may offer a novel solution to reducing postoperative complication rates and improving post-surgical outcomes after total joint arthroplasty (TJA). However, the variety of different ML models that exist paired with the increasing number of potential inputs can make the implementation of this tool challenging. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review to assess the most optimal inputs of different ML models in predicting postoperative (1) medical outcomes, (2) orthopedic outcomes, and (3) patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) after total joint arthroplasty.MethodsThe PubMed, MEDLINE, EBSCOhost, and Google Scholar databases were utilized to identify all studies evaluating ML models predicting outcomes following TJA between January 1, 2000, and June 23, 2023 (PROSPERO study protocol registration: CRD42023437586). The mean risk of bias in non-randomized studies-of interventions score, was 13.8 +/- 0.5. Our initial query yielded 656 articles, of which 25 articles aligned with our aims, examining over 20 machine learning models and 1,555,300 surgeries. The area under the curve (AUC), accuracy, inputs, and the importance of each input were reported.ResultsTwelve studies evaluating medical complications with 13 ML models reported AUCs ranging from 0.57 to 0.997 and accuracy between 88% and 99.98%. Key predictors included age, hyper-coagulopathy, total number of diagnoses, admission month, and malnutrition. Five studies evaluating orthopedic complications with 10 ML models reported AUCs from 0.49 to 0.93 and accuracy ranging from 92 to 97%, with age, BMI, CCI, AKSS scores, and height identified as key predictors. Ten studies evaluating PROMs comprising of 12 different ML models had an AUC ranging from 0.453 to 0.97 ranked preoperative PROMs as the post-predictive input. Overall, age was the most predictive risk factor for complications post-total joint arthroplasty (TJA).ConclusionThese studies demonstrate the predictive capabilities of these models for anticipating complications and outcomes. Furthermore, these studies also highlight ML models' ability to identify non-classical variables not commonly considered in addition to confirming variables known to be crucial. To advance the field, forthcoming research should adhere to established guidelines for model development and training, employ industry-standard input parameters, and subject their models to external validity assessments.
引用
收藏
页数:17
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Learning curve of total ankle arthroplasty: a systematic review
    Zaki Arshad
    Ibrahim Inzarul Haq
    Maneesh Bhatia
    [J]. Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, 2024, 144 : 591 - 600
  • [42] Learning curve of total ankle arthroplasty: a systematic review
    Arshad, Zaki
    Haq, Ibrahim Inzarul
    Bhatia, Maneesh
    [J]. ARCHIVES OF ORTHOPAEDIC AND TRAUMA SURGERY, 2024, 144 (02) : 591 - 600
  • [43] Comparable performance of machine learning algorithms in predicting readmission and complications following total joint arthroplasty with external validation
    Shaikh, Hashim J. F.
    Botros, Mina
    Ramirez, Gabriel
    Thirukumaran, Caroline P.
    Ricciardi, Benjamin
    Myers, Thomas G.
    [J]. ARTHROPLASTY, 2023, 5 (01)
  • [44] Comparable performance of machine learning algorithms in predicting readmission and complications following total joint arthroplasty with external validation
    Hashim J. F. Shaikh
    Mina Botros
    Gabriel Ramirez
    Caroline P. Thirukumaran
    Benjamin Ricciardi
    Thomas G. Myers
    [J]. Arthroplasty, 5
  • [45] Predicting total knee arthroplasty from ultrasonography using machine learning
    Tiulpin, Aleksei
    Saarakkala, Simo
    Mathiessen, Alexander
    Hammer, Hilde Berner
    Furnes, Ove
    Nordsletten, Lars
    Englund, Martin
    Magnusson, Karin
    [J]. OSTEOARTHRITIS AND CARTILAGE OPEN, 2022, 4 (04):
  • [46] Outcomes of Unconstrained Proximal Interphalangeal Joint Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review
    Kulkarni, Kunal
    Sheikh, Nomaan
    Aujla, Randeep
    Divall, Pip
    Dias, Joseph
    [J]. JOURNAL OF HAND SURGERY-ASIAN-PACIFIC VOLUME, 2022, 27 (02): : 300 - 312
  • [47] Clinical Decision Support Tools for Predicting Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review
    Cochrane, Jodie A.
    Flynn, Traci
    Wills, Adrian
    Walker, Frederick R.
    Nilsson, Michael
    Johnson, Sarah J.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ARTHROPLASTY, 2021, 36 (05): : 1832 - +
  • [48] Machine Learning Algorithms for Predicting Surgical Outcomes after Colorectal Surgery: A Systematic Review
    Bektas, Mustafa
    Tuynman, Jurriaan B.
    Pereira, Jaime Costa
    Burchell, George L.
    van der Peet, Donald L.
    [J]. WORLD JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2022, 46 (12) : 3100 - 3110
  • [49] Machine learning in predicting outcomes for stroke patients following rehabilitation treatment: A systematic review
    Zu, Wanting
    Huang, Xuemiao
    Xu, Tianxin
    Du, Lin
    Wang, Yiming
    Wang, Lisheng
    Nie, Wenbo
    [J]. PLOS ONE, 2023, 18 (06):
  • [50] Machine Learning Algorithms for Predicting Surgical Outcomes after Colorectal Surgery: A Systematic Review
    Mustafa Bektaş
    Jurriaan B. Tuynman
    Jaime Costa Pereira
    George L. Burchell
    Donald L. van der Peet
    [J]. World Journal of Surgery, 2022, 46 : 3100 - 3110