Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 20 of 26
Results per page:
The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 104-B, Issue 12 | Pages 1292 - 1303
1 Dec 2022
Polisetty TS Jain S Pang M Karnuta JM Vigdorchik JM Nawabi DH Wyles CC Ramkumar PN

Literature surrounding artificial intelligence (AI)-related applications for hip and knee arthroplasty has proliferated. However, meaningful advances that fundamentally transform the practice and delivery of joint arthroplasty are yet to be realized, despite the broad range of applications as we continue to search for meaningful and appropriate use of AI. AI literature in hip and knee arthroplasty between 2018 and 2021 regarding image-based analyses, value-based care, remote patient monitoring, and augmented reality was reviewed. Concerns surrounding meaningful use and appropriate methodological approaches of AI in joint arthroplasty research are summarized. Of the 233 AI-related orthopaedics articles published, 178 (76%) constituted original research, while the rest consisted of editorials or reviews. A total of 52% of original AI-related research concerns hip and knee arthroplasty (n = 92), and a narrative review is described. Three studies were externally validated. Pitfalls surrounding present-day research include conflating vernacular (“AI/machine learning”), repackaging limited registry data, prematurely releasing internally validated prediction models, appraising model architecture instead of inputted data, withholding code, and evaluating studies using antiquated regression-based guidelines. While AI has been applied to a variety of hip and knee arthroplasty applications with limited clinical impact, the future remains promising if the question is meaningful, the methodology is rigorous and transparent, the data are rich, and the model is externally validated. Simple checkpoints for meaningful AI adoption include ensuring applications focus on: administrative support over clinical evaluation and management; necessity of the advanced model; and the novelty of the question being answered. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(12):1292–1303


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 104-B, Issue 8 | Pages 911 - 914
1 Aug 2022
Prijs J Liao Z Ashkani-Esfahani S Olczak J Gordon M Jayakumar P Jutte PC Jaarsma RL IJpma FFA Doornberg JN

Artificial intelligence (AI) is, in essence, the concept of ‘computer thinking’, encompassing methods that train computers to perform and learn from executing certain tasks, called machine learning, and methods to build intricate computer models that both learn and adapt, called complex neural networks. Computer vision is a function of AI by which machine learning and complex neural networks can be applied to enable computers to capture, analyze, and interpret information from clinical images and visual inputs. This annotation summarizes key considerations and future perspectives concerning computer vision, questioning the need for this technology (the ‘why’), the current applications (the ‘what’), and the approach to unlocking its full potential (the ‘how’). Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(8):911–914


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 104-B, Issue 8 | Pages 929 - 937
1 Aug 2022
Gurung B Liu P Harris PDR Sagi A Field RE Sochart DH Tucker K Asopa V

Aims. Total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are common orthopaedic procedures requiring postoperative radiographs to confirm implant positioning and identify complications. Artificial intelligence (AI)-based image analysis has the potential to automate this postoperative surveillance. The aim of this study was to prepare a scoping review to investigate how AI is being used in the analysis of radiographs following THA and TKA, and how accurate these tools are. Methods. The Embase, MEDLINE, and PubMed libraries were systematically searched to identify relevant articles. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews and Arksey and O’Malley framework were followed. Study quality was assessed using a modified Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies tool. AI performance was reported using either the area under the curve (AUC) or accuracy. Results. Of the 455 studies identified, only 12 were suitable for inclusion. Nine reported implant identification and three described predicting risk of implant failure. Of the 12, three studies compared AI performance with orthopaedic surgeons. AI-based implant identification achieved AUC 0.992 to 1, and most algorithms reported an accuracy > 90%, using 550 to 320,000 training radiographs. AI prediction of dislocation risk post-THA, determined after five-year follow-up, was satisfactory (AUC 76.67; 8,500 training radiographs). Diagnosis of hip implant loosening was good (accuracy 88.3%; 420 training radiographs) and measurement of postoperative acetabular angles was comparable to humans (mean absolute difference 1.35° to 1.39°). However, 11 of the 12 studies had several methodological limitations introducing a high risk of bias. None of the studies were externally validated. Conclusion. These studies show that AI is promising. While it already has the ability to analyze images with significant precision, there is currently insufficient high-level evidence to support its widespread clinical use. Further research to design robust studies that follow standard reporting guidelines should be encouraged to develop AI models that could be easily translated into real-world conditions. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(8):929–937


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 101-B, Issue 12 | Pages 1476 - 1478
1 Dec 2019
Bayliss L Jones LD

This annotation briefly reviews the history of artificial intelligence and machine learning in health care and orthopaedics, and considers the role it will have in the future, particularly with reference to statistical analyses involving large datasets. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:1476–1478


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 103-B, Issue 9 | Pages 1442 - 1448
1 Sep 2021
McDonnell JM Evans SR McCarthy L Temperley H Waters C Ahern D Cunniffe G Morris S Synnott K Birch N Butler JS

In recent years, machine learning (ML) and artificial neural networks (ANNs), a particular subset of ML, have been adopted by various areas of healthcare. A number of diagnostic and prognostic algorithms have been designed and implemented across a range of orthopaedic sub-specialties to date, with many positive results. However, the methodology of many of these studies is flawed, and few compare the use of ML with the current approach in clinical practice. Spinal surgery has advanced rapidly over the past three decades, particularly in the areas of implant technology, advanced surgical techniques, biologics, and enhanced recovery protocols. It is therefore regarded an innovative field. Inevitably, spinal surgeons will wish to incorporate ML into their practice should models prove effective in diagnostic or prognostic terms. The purpose of this article is to review published studies that describe the application of neural networks to spinal surgery and which actively compare ANN models to contemporary clinical standards allowing evaluation of their efficacy, accuracy, and relatability. It also explores some of the limitations of the technology, which act to constrain the widespread adoption of neural networks for diagnostic and prognostic use in spinal care. Finally, it describes the necessary considerations should institutions wish to incorporate ANNs into their practices. In doing so, the aim of this review is to provide a practical approach for spinal surgeons to understand the relevant aspects of neural networks.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(9):1442–1448.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 105-B, Issue 6 | Pages 585 - 586
17 Apr 2023
Leopold SS Haddad FS Sandell LJ Swiontkowski M


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 106-B, Issue 7 | Pages 688 - 695
1 Jul 2024
Farrow L Zhong M Anderson L

Aims. To examine whether natural language processing (NLP) using a clinically based large language model (LLM) could be used to predict patient selection for total hip or total knee arthroplasty (THA/TKA) from routinely available free-text radiology reports. Methods. Data pre-processing and analyses were conducted according to the Artificial intelligence to Revolutionize the patient Care pathway in Hip and knEe aRthroplastY (ARCHERY) project protocol. This included use of de-identified Scottish regional clinical data of patients referred for consideration of THA/TKA, held in a secure data environment designed for artificial intelligence (AI) inference. Only preoperative radiology reports were included. NLP algorithms were based on the freely available GatorTron model, a LLM trained on over 82 billion words of de-identified clinical text. Two inference tasks were performed: assessment after model-fine tuning (50 Epochs and three cycles of k-fold cross validation), and external validation. Results. For THA, there were 5,558 patient radiology reports included, of which 4,137 were used for model training and testing, and 1,421 for external validation. Following training, model performance demonstrated average (mean across three folds) accuracy, F1 score, and area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC) values of 0.850 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.833 to 0.867), 0.813 (95% CI 0.785 to 0.841), and 0.847 (95% CI 0.822 to 0.872), respectively. For TKA, 7,457 patient radiology reports were included, with 3,478 used for model training and testing, and 3,152 for external validation. Performance metrics included accuracy, F1 score, and AUROC values of 0.757 (95% CI 0.702 to 0.811), 0.543 (95% CI 0.479 to 0.607), and 0.717 (95% CI 0.657 to 0.778) respectively. There was a notable deterioration in performance on external validation in both cohorts. Conclusion. The use of routinely available preoperative radiology reports provides promising potential to help screen suitable candidates for THA, but not for TKA. The external validation results demonstrate the importance of further model testing and training when confronted with new clinical cohorts. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(7):688–695


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 103-B, Issue 12 | Pages 1754 - 1758
1 Dec 2021
Farrow L Zhong M Ashcroft GP Anderson L Meek RMD

There is increasing popularity in the use of artificial intelligence and machine-learning techniques to provide diagnostic and prognostic models for various aspects of Trauma & Orthopaedic surgery. However, correct interpretation of these models is difficult for those without specific knowledge of computing or health data science methodology. Lack of current reporting standards leads to the potential for significant heterogeneity in the design and quality of published studies. We provide an overview of machine-learning techniques for the lay individual, including key terminology and best practice reporting guidelines. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(12):1754–1758


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 105-B, Issue 6 | Pages 587 - 589
1 Jun 2023
Kunze KN Jang SJ Fullerton MA Vigdorchik JM Haddad FS

The OpenAI chatbot ChatGPT is an artificial intelligence (AI) application that uses state-of-the-art language processing AI. It can perform a vast number of tasks, from writing poetry and explaining complex quantum mechanics, to translating language and writing research articles with a human-like understanding and legitimacy. Since its initial release to the public in November 2022, ChatGPT has garnered considerable attention due to its ability to mimic the patterns of human language, and it has attracted billion-dollar investments from Microsoft and PricewaterhouseCoopers. The scope of ChatGPT and other large language models appears infinite, but there are several important limitations. This editorial provides an introduction to the basic functionality of ChatGPT and other large language models, their current applications and limitations, and the associated implications for clinical practice and research. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(6):587–589


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 102-B, Issue 11 | Pages 1574 - 1581
2 Nov 2020
Zhang S Sun J Liu C Fang J Xie H Ning B

Aims. The diagnosis of developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) is challenging owing to extensive variation in paediatric pelvic anatomy. Artificial intelligence (AI) may represent an effective diagnostic tool for DDH. Here, we aimed to develop an anteroposterior pelvic radiograph deep learning system for diagnosing DDH in children and analyze the feasibility of its application. Methods. In total, 10,219 anteroposterior pelvic radiographs were retrospectively collected from April 2014 to December 2018. Clinicians labelled each radiograph using a uniform standard method. Radiographs were grouped according to age and into ‘dislocation’ (dislocation and subluxation) and ‘non-dislocation’ (normal cases and those with dysplasia of the acetabulum) groups based on clinical diagnosis. The deep learning system was trained and optimized using 9,081 radiographs; 1,138 test radiographs were then used to compare the diagnoses made by deep learning system and clinicians. The accuracy of the deep learning system was determined using a receiver operating characteristic curve, and the consistency of acetabular index measurements was evaluated using Bland-Altman plots. Results. In all, 1,138 patients (242 males; 896 females; mean age 1.5 years (SD 1.79; 0 to 10) were included in this study. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, sensitivity, and specificity of the deep learning system for diagnosing hip dislocation were 0.975, 276/289 (95.5%), and 1,978/1,987 (99.5%), respectively. Compared with clinical diagnoses, the Bland-Altman 95% limits of agreement for acetabular index, as determined by the deep learning system from the radiographs of non-dislocated and dislocated hips, were -3.27° - 2.94° and -7.36° - 5.36°, respectively (p < 0.001). Conclusion. The deep learning system was highly consistent, more convenient, and more effective for diagnosing DDH compared with clinician-led diagnoses. Deep learning systems should be considered for analysis of anteroposterior pelvic radiographs when diagnosing DDH. The deep learning system will improve the current artificially complicated screening referral process. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(11):1574–1581


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 104-B, Issue 8 | Pages 909 - 910
1 Aug 2022
Vigdorchik JM Jang SJ Taunton MJ Haddad FS


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 106-B, Issue 3 | Pages 232 - 239
1 Mar 2024
Osmani HT Nicolaou N Anand S Gower J Metcalfe A McDonnell S

Aims

To identify unanswered questions about the prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and rehabilitation and delivery of care of first-time soft-tissue knee injuries (ligament injuries, patella dislocations, meniscal injuries, and articular cartilage) in children (aged 12 years and older) and adults.

Methods

The James Lind Alliance (JLA) methodology for Priority Setting Partnerships was followed. An initial survey invited patients and healthcare professionals from the UK to submit any uncertainties regarding soft-tissue knee injury prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and rehabilitation and delivery of care. Over 1,000 questions were received. From these, 74 questions (identifying common concerns) were formulated and checked against the best available evidence. An interim survey was then conducted and 27 questions were taken forward to the final workshop, held in January 2023, where they were discussed, ranked, and scored in multiple rounds of prioritization. This was conducted by healthcare professionals, patients, and carers.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 104-B, Issue 10 | Pages 1189 - 1189
1 Oct 2022
Prijs J Liao Z Ashkani-Esfahani S Olczak J Gordon M Jayakumar P Jutte PC Jaarsma RL IJpma FFA Doornberg JN


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 104-B, Issue 12 | Pages 1279 - 1280
1 Dec 2022
Haddad FS


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 105-B, Issue 12 | Pages 1233 - 1234
1 Dec 2023
Haddad FS


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 106-B, Issue 5 | Pages 420 - 421
1 May 2024
Oussedik S Haddad FS


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 104-B, Issue 11 | Pages 1191 - 1192
1 Nov 2022
Haddad FS


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 106-B, Issue 1 | Pages 3 - 5
1 Jan 2024
Fontalis A Haddad FS


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 106-B, Issue 8 | Pages 760 - 763
1 Aug 2024
Mancino F Fontalis A Haddad FS


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 105-B, Issue 3 | Pages 221 - 226
1 Mar 2023
Wilton T Skinner JA Haddad FS

Recent publications have drawn attention to the fact that some brands of joint replacement may contain variants which perform significantly worse (or better) than their ‘siblings’. As a result, the National Joint Registry has performed much more detailed analysis on the larger families of knee arthroplasties in order to identify exactly where these differences may be present and may hitherto have remained hidden. The analysis of the Nexgen knee arthroplasty brand identified that some posterior-stabilized combinations have particularly high revision rates for aseptic loosening of the tibia, and consequently a medical device recall has been issued for the Nexgen ‘option’ tibial component which was implicated. More elaborate signal detection is required in order to identify such variation in results in a routine fashion if patients are to be protected from such variation in outcomes between closely related implant types.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(3):221–226.