Machine-learning vs. logistic regression for preoperative prediction of medical morbidity after fast-track hip and knee arthroplasty-a comparative study.

Enhanced recovery after surgery Hip replacement Knee replacement Machine learning Perioperative care Postoperative complications Risk assessment

Journal

BMC anesthesiology
ISSN: 1471-2253
Titre abrégé: BMC Anesthesiol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968535

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
29 Nov 2023
Historique:
received: 21 04 2023
accepted: 21 11 2023
medline: 1 12 2023
pubmed: 30 11 2023
entrez: 29 11 2023
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Machine-learning models may improve prediction of length of stay (LOS) and morbidity after surgery. However, few studies include fast-track programs, and most rely on administrative coding with limited follow-up and information on perioperative care. This study investigates potential benefits of a machine-learning model for prediction of postoperative morbidity in fast-track total hip (THA) and knee arthroplasty (TKA). Cohort study in consecutive unselected primary THA/TKA between 2014-2017 from seven Danish centers with established fast-track protocols. Preoperative comorbidity and prescribed medication were recorded prospectively and information on length of stay and readmissions was obtained through the Danish National Patient Registry and medical records. We used a machine-learning model (Boosted Decision Trees) based on boosted decision trees with 33 preoperative variables for predicting "medical" morbidity leading to LOS > 4 days or 90-days readmissions and compared to a logistical regression model based on the same variables. We also evaluated two parsimonious models, using the ten most important variables in the full machine-learning and logistic regression models. Data collected between 2014-2016 (n:18,013) was used for model training and data from 2017 (n:3913) was used for testing. Model performances were analyzed using precision, area under receiver operating (AUROC) and precision recall curves (AUPRC), as well as the Mathews Correlation Coefficient. Variable importance was analyzed using Shapley Additive Explanations values. Using a threshold of 20% "risk-patients" (n:782), precision, AUROC and AUPRC were 13.6%, 76.3% and 15.5% vs. 12.4%, 74.7% and 15.6% for the machine-learning and logistic regression model, respectively. The parsimonious machine-learning model performed better than the full logistic regression model. Of the top ten variables, eight were shared between the machine-learning and logistic regression models, but with a considerable age-related variation in importance of specific types of medication. A machine-learning model using preoperative characteristics and prescriptions slightly improved identification of patients in high-risk of "medical" complications after fast-track THA and TKA compared to a logistic regression model. Such algorithms could help find a manageable population of patients who may benefit most from intensified perioperative care.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Machine-learning models may improve prediction of length of stay (LOS) and morbidity after surgery. However, few studies include fast-track programs, and most rely on administrative coding with limited follow-up and information on perioperative care. This study investigates potential benefits of a machine-learning model for prediction of postoperative morbidity in fast-track total hip (THA) and knee arthroplasty (TKA).
METHODS METHODS
Cohort study in consecutive unselected primary THA/TKA between 2014-2017 from seven Danish centers with established fast-track protocols. Preoperative comorbidity and prescribed medication were recorded prospectively and information on length of stay and readmissions was obtained through the Danish National Patient Registry and medical records. We used a machine-learning model (Boosted Decision Trees) based on boosted decision trees with 33 preoperative variables for predicting "medical" morbidity leading to LOS > 4 days or 90-days readmissions and compared to a logistical regression model based on the same variables. We also evaluated two parsimonious models, using the ten most important variables in the full machine-learning and logistic regression models. Data collected between 2014-2016 (n:18,013) was used for model training and data from 2017 (n:3913) was used for testing. Model performances were analyzed using precision, area under receiver operating (AUROC) and precision recall curves (AUPRC), as well as the Mathews Correlation Coefficient. Variable importance was analyzed using Shapley Additive Explanations values.
RESULTS RESULTS
Using a threshold of 20% "risk-patients" (n:782), precision, AUROC and AUPRC were 13.6%, 76.3% and 15.5% vs. 12.4%, 74.7% and 15.6% for the machine-learning and logistic regression model, respectively. The parsimonious machine-learning model performed better than the full logistic regression model. Of the top ten variables, eight were shared between the machine-learning and logistic regression models, but with a considerable age-related variation in importance of specific types of medication.
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
A machine-learning model using preoperative characteristics and prescriptions slightly improved identification of patients in high-risk of "medical" complications after fast-track THA and TKA compared to a logistic regression model. Such algorithms could help find a manageable population of patients who may benefit most from intensified perioperative care.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38030979
doi: 10.1186/s12871-023-02354-z
pii: 10.1186/s12871-023-02354-z
pmc: PMC10685559
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

391

Subventions

Organisme : The Lundbeck Foundation
ID : R25-A2702
Organisme : The Lundbeck Foundation
ID : R25-A2702
Organisme : The Lundbeck Foundation
ID : R25-A2702

Informations de copyright

© 2023. The Author(s).

Références

Nat Mach Intell. 2020 Jan;2(1):56-67
pubmed: 32607472
Anaesthesia. 2014 Jan;69 Suppl 1:81-98
pubmed: 24303864
Front Surg. 2021 Mar 11;8:606038
pubmed: 33777997
J Arthroplasty. 2019 Oct;34(10):2201-2203
pubmed: 31253449
J Arthroplasty. 2021 Jun;36(6):2024-2032
pubmed: 33558044
J Arthroplasty. 2020 Jun;35(6):1466-1473.e1
pubmed: 31982243
Acta Orthop. 2022 Jan 03;93:117-123
pubmed: 34984485
Ann Intern Med. 2015 Jan 6;162(1):W1-73
pubmed: 25560730
J Knee Surg. 2022 Jan;35(1):7-14
pubmed: 32512596
BMJ. 2020 Mar 18;368:m441
pubmed: 32188600
Clin Epidemiol. 2015 Nov 17;7:449-90
pubmed: 26604824
Arthroplast Today. 2021 Sep 03;11:103-112
pubmed: 34522738
J Arthroplasty. 2018 Jan;33(1):41-45.e3
pubmed: 29017802
BioData Min. 2021 Feb 4;14(1):13
pubmed: 33541410
Clin Epidemiol. 2012;4:303-13
pubmed: 23204870
J Arthroplasty. 2021 May;36(5):1655-1662.e1
pubmed: 33478891
BMJ Open. 2016 Jan 12;6(1):e009813
pubmed: 26758264
Acta Orthop. 2021 Oct;92(5):513-525
pubmed: 33988081
Anaesthesia. 2023 May;78(5):607-619
pubmed: 36823388
J Arthroplasty. 2019 Oct;34(10):2228-2234.e1
pubmed: 31122849
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2018 Mar 7;100(5):360-367
pubmed: 29509612
J Arthroplasty. 2019 Oct;34(10):2220-2227.e1
pubmed: 31285089
Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2015 Feb;32(2):88-105
pubmed: 25058504
Arthroplast Today. 2021 Apr 13;8:194-199
pubmed: 33937457
Sci Rep. 2020 Dec 4;10(1):21233
pubmed: 33277508
Bone Joint J. 2021 Aug;103-B(8):1358-1366
pubmed: 34334050
Lancet Digit Health. 2021 Aug;3(8):e471-e485
pubmed: 34215564
J Arthroplasty. 2019 Sep;34(9):2124-2165.e1
pubmed: 31182407
PeerJ Comput Sci. 2021 Mar 4;7:e398
pubmed: 33817044
J Arthroplasty. 2020 Nov;35(11):3353-3363
pubmed: 32600816
Acta Orthop. 2021 Apr;92(2):170-175
pubmed: 33176546
JMIR Med Inform. 2020 Nov 27;8(11):e19761
pubmed: 33245283
BioData Min. 2017 Dec 8;10:35
pubmed: 29234465
J Arthroplasty. 2021 May;36(5):1568-1576
pubmed: 33358514
Acta Orthop. 2014 Feb;85(1):26-31
pubmed: 24359028
J Am Coll Surg. 2023 May 1;236(5):1024-1030
pubmed: 36728295

Auteurs

Christian Michelsen (C)

The Niels Bohr Institute, University of Copenhagen, Blegdamsvej 17, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Christoffer C Jørgensen (CC)

Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Hospital of Northern Zealand, Dyrehavevej 29 3400, Hillerød, Denmark. christoffer.calov.joergensen@regionh.dk.
The Centre for Fast-Track Hip and Knee Replacement, 7621, Rigshospitalet, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark. christoffer.calov.joergensen@regionh.dk.

Mathias Heltberg (M)

The Niels Bohr Institute, University of Copenhagen, Blegdamsvej 17, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Mogens H Jensen (MH)

The Niels Bohr Institute, University of Copenhagen, Blegdamsvej 17, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Alessandra Lucchetti (A)

The Niels Bohr Institute, University of Copenhagen, Blegdamsvej 17, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Pelle B Petersen (PB)

Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Hospital of Northern Zealand, Dyrehavevej 29 3400, Hillerød, Denmark.
The Centre for Fast-Track Hip and Knee Replacement, 7621, Rigshospitalet, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Troels Petersen (T)

The Niels Bohr Institute, University of Copenhagen, Blegdamsvej 17, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Henrik Kehlet (H)

The Centre for Fast-Track Hip and Knee Replacement, 7621, Rigshospitalet, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Section of Surgical Pathophysiology, 7621, Rigshospitalet, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH