[Artificial intelligence and novel approaches for treatment of non-union in bone : From established standard methods in medicine up to novel fields of research].
Künstliche Intelligenz und Ausblick auf Anwendungsfelder in der Pseudarthrosentherapie : Von etablierten Standardmethoden in der Medizin hin zu neuen Forschungsfeldern.
Cost analysis
Data science
Fracture healing
Personalized medicine
Prediction models
Journal
Unfallchirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany)
ISSN: 2731-703X
Titre abrégé: Unfallchirurgie (Heidelb)
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9918384886306676
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Aug 2022
Aug 2022
Historique:
accepted:
02
06
2022
pubmed:
10
7
2022
medline:
6
8
2022
entrez:
9
7
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Methods of artificial intelligence (AI) have found applications in many fields of medicine within the last few years. Some disciplines already use these methods regularly within their clinical routine. However, the fields of application are wide and there are still many opportunities to apply these new AI concepts. This review article gives an insight into the history of AI and defines the special terms and fields, such as machine learning (ML), neural networks and deep learning. The classical steps in developing AI models are demonstrated here, as well as the iteration of data rectification and preparation, the training of a model and subsequent validation before transfer into a clinical setting are explained. Currently, musculoskeletal disciplines implement methods of ML and also neural networks, e.g. for identification of fractures or for classifications. Also, predictive models based on risk factor analysis for prevention of complications are being initiated. As non-union in bone is a rare but very complex disease with dramatic socioeconomic impact for the healthcare system, many open questions arise which could be better understood by using methods of AI in the future. New fields of research applying AI models range from predictive models and cost analysis to personalized treatment strategies. Methoden der künstlichen Intelligenz (KI) haben in den letzten Jahren zunehmend Einzug in die Medizin gefunden. Einige Fachbereiche nutzen diese schon regelmäßig im klinischen Alltag. Die Anwendungsfelder sind weit, aber bisher noch nicht ausgeschöpft und in ihrer Vielfalt nicht ausreichend verstanden. Dieser Übersichtsbeitrag gibt einen Einblick in die Historie der KI und definiert die unterschiedlichen Begrifflichkeiten und Bereiche wie maschinelles Lernen (ML), neuronale Netze oder Deep Learning. Es werden die klassischen Schritte zur Entwicklung eines KI-Modells demonstriert sowie der Kreislauf der Datenbereinigung, -vorbereitung, das Training eines Modells bis hin zur Validierung und Umsetzung in der Praxis des klinischen Alltags erklärt. Bisherige Anwendungsfelder im muskuloskeletalen Fachbereich nutzen sowohl Methoden des ML als auch neuronaler Netze, z. B. zur Identifikation von Frakturen oder zur Klassifizierung. Prädikative Modelle anhand von Risikofaktoren mit dem Ziel der Komplikationsprävention finden erste Anwendung. Da Pseudarthrosen ein zwar seltenes, aber komplexes Krankheitsbild mit soziökonomischer Tragweite darstellen, ergeben sich viele noch offene Fragestellungen, die mithilfe der Methoden der KI zukünftig beantwortet werden könnten. Neue Forschungsfelder unter Nutzung von KI reichen von Prädikationsmodellen über Kostenanalysen bis hin zu personalisierter Therapie.
Autres résumés
Type: Publisher
(ger)
Methoden der künstlichen Intelligenz (KI) haben in den letzten Jahren zunehmend Einzug in die Medizin gefunden. Einige Fachbereiche nutzen diese schon regelmäßig im klinischen Alltag. Die Anwendungsfelder sind weit, aber bisher noch nicht ausgeschöpft und in ihrer Vielfalt nicht ausreichend verstanden. Dieser Übersichtsbeitrag gibt einen Einblick in die Historie der KI und definiert die unterschiedlichen Begrifflichkeiten und Bereiche wie maschinelles Lernen (ML), neuronale Netze oder Deep Learning. Es werden die klassischen Schritte zur Entwicklung eines KI-Modells demonstriert sowie der Kreislauf der Datenbereinigung, -vorbereitung, das Training eines Modells bis hin zur Validierung und Umsetzung in der Praxis des klinischen Alltags erklärt. Bisherige Anwendungsfelder im muskuloskeletalen Fachbereich nutzen sowohl Methoden des ML als auch neuronaler Netze, z. B. zur Identifikation von Frakturen oder zur Klassifizierung. Prädikative Modelle anhand von Risikofaktoren mit dem Ziel der Komplikationsprävention finden erste Anwendung. Da Pseudarthrosen ein zwar seltenes, aber komplexes Krankheitsbild mit soziökonomischer Tragweite darstellen, ergeben sich viele noch offene Fragestellungen, die mithilfe der Methoden der KI zukünftig beantwortet werden könnten. Neue Forschungsfelder unter Nutzung von KI reichen von Prädikationsmodellen über Kostenanalysen bis hin zu personalisierter Therapie.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35810261
doi: 10.1007/s00113-022-01202-y
pii: 10.1007/s00113-022-01202-y
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
ger
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
611-618Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Medizin Verlag GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature.
Références
Turing AM (1950) Computing machinery and intelligence. Mind 59:433–460. https://doi.org/10.1093/mind/LIX.236.433
doi: 10.1093/mind/LIX.236.433
McCarthy J, Minsky ML, Rochester N et al (1956) A proposal for the Dartmouth summer research project on artificial intelligence. Dartmouth Conference. Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire
Shortliffe E (1976) Computer-based medical consultations: MYCIN. Elsevier https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-00179-5.X5001-X
doi: 10.1016/B978-0-444-00179-5.X5001-X
Lalehzarian SP, Gowd AK, Liu JN (2021) Machine learning in orthopaedic surgery. World J Orthop 12:685–699. https://doi.org/10.5312/wjo.v12.i9.685
doi: 10.5312/wjo.v12.i9.685
pubmed: 34631452
pmcid: 8472446
Olczak J, Pavlopoulos J, Prijs J et al (2021) Presenting artificial intelligence, deep learning, and machine learning studies to clinicians and healthcare stakeholders: an introductory reference with a guideline and a Clinical AI Research (CAIR) checklist proposal. Acta Orthop 92:513–525. https://doi.org/10.1080/17453674.2021.1918389
doi: 10.1080/17453674.2021.1918389
pubmed: 33988081
pmcid: 8519529
Jordan MI, Mitchell TM (2015) Machine learning: trends, perspectives, and prospects. Science 349:255–260. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaa8415
doi: 10.1126/science.aaa8415
pubmed: 26185243
Campbell M, Hoane AJ Jr, Hsu F (2002) Deep blue. Artif Intell 134:57–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0004-3702(01)00129-1
doi: 10.1016/S0004-3702(01)00129-1
Ferrucci D, Brown E, Chu-Carroll J et al (2010) Building watson: an overview of the deepQA project. Artif Intell Mag 31(3):59–79. https://doi.org/10.1609/aimag.v31i3.2303
doi: 10.1609/aimag.v31i3.2303
Silver D, Huang A, Maddison CJ et al (2016) Mastering the game of go with deep neural networks and tree search. Nature 529:484–489. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature16961
doi: 10.1038/nature16961
pubmed: 26819042
Wyatt JM, Booth GJ, Goldman AH (2021) Natural language processing and its use in orthopaedic research. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med 14:392–396. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12178-021-09734-3
doi: 10.1007/s12178-021-09734-3
pubmed: 34755276
pmcid: 8577962
Thirukumaran CP, Zaman A, Rubery PT et al (2019) Natural language processing for the identification of surgical site infections in orthopaedics. J Bone Joint Surg Am 101:2167–2174. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.19.00661
doi: 10.2106/JBJS.19.00661
pubmed: 31596819
Phung VH, Rhee EJ (2019) A high-accuracy model average ensemble of convolutional neural networks for classification of cloud image patches on small datasets. Appl Sci. https://doi.org/10.3390/app9214500
doi: 10.3390/app9214500
Myers TG, Ramkumar PN, Ricciardi BF et al (2020) Artificial intelligence and orthopaedics: an introduction for clinicians. J Bone Joint Surg Am 102:830–840. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.19.01128
doi: 10.2106/JBJS.19.01128
pubmed: 32379124
Geron A (2019) Hands-on machine learning with Scikit—learn, Keras and tensor flow. O’Reilly Media
Martins LF (2014) IPython notebook essentials. Packt
Schmidhuber J (2015) Deep learning in neural networks: an overview. Neural Netw 61:85–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neunet.2014.09.003
doi: 10.1016/j.neunet.2014.09.003
pubmed: 25462637
Zhao W, Davis CE (2011) A modified artificial immune system based pattern recognition approach—an application to clinical diagnostics. Artif Intell Med 52:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artmed.2011.03.001
doi: 10.1016/j.artmed.2011.03.001
pubmed: 21515033
pmcid: 3108456
Kohonen T (2006) Self-organizing neural projections. Neural Netw 19:723–733. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neunet.2006.05.001
doi: 10.1016/j.neunet.2006.05.001
pubmed: 16774731
LeCun Y, Bengio Y, Hinton G (2015) Deep learning. Nature 521:436–444. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14539
doi: 10.1038/nature14539
pubmed: 26017442
Borjali A, Chen AF, Muratoglu OK et al (2020) Detecting total hip replacement prosthesis design on plain radiographs using deep convolutional neural network. J Orthop Res 38:1465–1471. https://doi.org/10.1002/jor.24617
doi: 10.1002/jor.24617
pubmed: 31997411
Erne F, Dehncke D, Herath SC et al (2021) Deep learning in the detection of rare fractures—development of a “deep learning convolutional network” model for detecting Acetabular fractures. Z Orthop Unfall. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1511-8595
doi: 10.1055/a-1511-8595
pubmed: 34359091
Olczak J, Emilson F, Razavian A et al (2021) Ankle fracture classification using deep learning: automating detailed AO Foundation/Orthopedic Trauma Association (AO/OTA) 2018 malleolar fracture identification reaches a high degree of correct classification. Acta Orthop 92:102–108. https://doi.org/10.1080/17453674.2020.1837420
doi: 10.1080/17453674.2020.1837420
pubmed: 33103536
Kruse C, Eiken P, Vestergaard P (2017) Machine learning principles can improve hip fracture prediction. Calcif Tissue Int 100:348–360. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00223-017-0238-7
doi: 10.1007/s00223-017-0238-7
pubmed: 28197643
Xue Y, Zhang R, Deng Y et al (2017) A preliminary examination of the diagnostic value of deep learning in hip osteoarthritis. PLoS ONE 12:e178992. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0178992
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0178992
pubmed: 28575070
pmcid: 5456368
Begg R, Kamruzzaman J (2005) A machine learning approach for automated recognition of movement patterns using basic, kinetic and kinematic gait data. J Biomech 38:401–408. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2004.05.002
doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2004.05.002
pubmed: 15652537
Joyseeree R, Abou Sabha R, Mueller H (2015) Applying machine learning to gait analysis data for disease identification. Stud Health Technol Inform 210:850–854
pubmed: 25991275
Sikka RS, Baer M, Raja A et al (2019) Analytics in sports medicine: implications and responsibilities that accompany the era of big data. J Bone Joint Surg Am 101:276–283. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.17.01601
doi: 10.2106/JBJS.17.01601
pubmed: 30730488
Ekegren CL, Edwards ER, de Steiger R et al (2018) Incidence, costs and predictors of non-union, delayed union and mal-union following long bone fracture. Int J Environ Res Public Health. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15122845
doi: 10.3390/ijerph15122845
pubmed: 30551632
pmcid: 6313538
McCoy TH Jr., Fragomen AT, Hart KL et al (2019) Genomewide association study of fracture nonunion using electronic health records. JBMR Plus 3:23–28. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm4.10063
doi: 10.1002/jbm4.10063
pubmed: 30680360
Mills LA, Aitken SA, Simpson A (2017) The risk of non-union per fracture: current myths and revised figures from a population of over 4 million adults. Acta Orthop 88:434–439. https://doi.org/10.1080/17453674.2017.1321351
doi: 10.1080/17453674.2017.1321351
pubmed: 28508682
pmcid: 5499337
Calori GM, Colombo M, Mazza EL et al (2014) Validation of the non-union scoring system in 300 long bone non-unions. Injury 45(Suppl 6):S93–S97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2014.10.030
doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2014.10.030
pubmed: 25457326
Calori GM, Phillips M, Jeetle S et al (2008) Classification of non-union: need for a new scoring system? Injury 39(Suppl 2):S59–S63. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0020-1383(08)70016-0
doi: 10.1016/S0020-1383(08)70016-0
pubmed: 18804575
Santolini E, West RM, Giannoudis PV (2020) Leeds-Genoa Non-Union Index: a clinical tool for asessing the need for early intervention after long bone fracture fixation. Int Orthop 44:161–172. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-019-04376-0
doi: 10.1007/s00264-019-04376-0
pubmed: 31440889
Whelan DB, Bhandari M, Stephen D et al (2010) Development of the radiographic union score for tibial fractures for the assessment of tibial fracture healing after intramedullary fixation. J Trauma 68:629–632. https://doi.org/10.1097/TA.0b013e3181a7c16d
doi: 10.1097/TA.0b013e3181a7c16d
pubmed: 19996801
Karnuta JM, Navarro SM, Haeberle HS et al (2019) Bundled care for hip fractures: a machine-learning approach to an untenable patient-specific payment model. J Orthop Trauma 33:324–330. https://doi.org/10.1097/BOT.0000000000001454
doi: 10.1097/BOT.0000000000001454
pubmed: 30730360
Navarro SM, Wang EY, Haeberle HS et al (2018) Machine learning and primary total knee arthroplasty: patient forecasting for a patient-specific payment model. J Arthroplasty 33:3617–3623. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2018.08.028
doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2018.08.028
pubmed: 30243882
Ramkumar PN, Haeberle HS, Bloomfield MR et al (2019) Artificial intelligence and arthroplasty at a single institution: real-world applications of machine learning to big data, value-based care, mobile health, and remote patient monitoring. J Arthroplasty 34:2204–2209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2019.06.018
doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2019.06.018
pubmed: 31280916
Ramkumar PN, Navarro SM, Haeberle HS et al (2019) Development and validation of a machine learning algorithm after primary total hip arthroplasty: applications to length of stay and payment models. J Arthroplasty 34:632–637. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2018.12.030
doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2018.12.030
pubmed: 30665831
Beard DJ, Harris K, Dawson J et al (2015) Meaningful changes for the Oxford hip and knee scores after joint replacement surgery. J Clin Epidemiol 68:73–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.08.009
doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.08.009
pubmed: 25441700
pmcid: 4270450
Fontana MA, Lyman S, Sarker GK et al (2019) Can machine learning algorithms predict which patients Will achieve minimally clinically important differences from total joint arthroplasty? Clin Orthop Relat Res 477:1267–1279. https://doi.org/10.1097/CORR.0000000000000687
doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000000687
pubmed: 31094833
pmcid: 6554103
Keurentjes JC, Van Tol FR, Fiocco M et al (2012) Minimal clinically important differences in health-related quality of life after total hip or knee replacement: a systematic review. Bone Joint Res 1:71–77. https://doi.org/10.1302/2046-3758.15.2000065
doi: 10.1302/2046-3758.15.2000065
pubmed: 23610674
pmcid: 3626243
Rupp M, Walter N, Pfeifer C et al (2021) Inzidenz von Frakturen in der Ewachsenenpopulation in Deutschland. Dtsch Arztebl Int 40:665–669