Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 9 of 9
Results per page:
Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 4, Issue 3 | Pages 168 - 181
14 Mar 2023
Dijkstra H Oosterhoff JHF van de Kuit A IJpma FFA Schwab JH Poolman RW Sprague S Bzovsky S Bhandari M Swiontkowski M Schemitsch EH Doornberg JN Hendrickx LAM

Aims. To develop prediction models using machine-learning (ML) algorithms for 90-day and one-year mortality prediction in femoral neck fracture (FNF) patients aged 50 years or older based on the Hip fracture Evaluation with Alternatives of Total Hip arthroplasty versus Hemiarthroplasty (HEALTH) and Fixation using Alternative Implants for the Treatment of Hip fractures (FAITH) trials. Methods. This study included 2,388 patients from the HEALTH and FAITH trials, with 90-day and one-year mortality proportions of 3.0% (71/2,388) and 6.4% (153/2,388), respectively. The mean age was 75.9 years (SD 10.8) and 65.9% of patients (1,574/2,388) were female. The algorithms included patient and injury characteristics. Six algorithms were developed, internally validated and evaluated across discrimination (c-statistic; discriminative ability between those with risk of mortality and those without), calibration (observed outcome compared to the predicted probability), and the Brier score (composite of discrimination and calibration). Results. The developed algorithms distinguished between patients at high and low risk for 90-day and one-year mortality. The penalized logistic regression algorithm had the best performance metrics for both 90-day (c-statistic 0.80, calibration slope 0.95, calibration intercept -0.06, and Brier score 0.039) and one-year (c-statistic 0.76, calibration slope 0.86, calibration intercept -0.20, and Brier score 0.074) mortality prediction in the hold-out set. Conclusion. Using high-quality data, the ML-based prediction models accurately predicted 90-day and one-year mortality in patients aged 50 years or older with a FNF. The final models must be externally validated to assess generalizability to other populations, and prospectively evaluated in the process of shared decision-making. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(3):168–181


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 106-B, Issue 2 | Pages 203 - 211
1 Feb 2024
Park JH Won J Kim H Kim Y Kim S Han I

Aims. This study aimed to compare the performance of survival prediction models for bone metastases of the extremities (BM-E) with pathological fractures in an Asian cohort, and investigate patient characteristics associated with survival. Methods. This retrospective cohort study included 469 patients, who underwent surgery for BM-E between January 2009 and March 2022 at a tertiary hospital in South Korea. Postoperative survival was calculated using the PATHFx3.0, SPRING13, OPTIModel, SORG, and IOR models. Model performance was assessed with area under the curve (AUC), calibration curve, Brier score, and decision curve analysis. Cox regression analyses were performed to evaluate the factors contributing to survival. Results. The SORG model demonstrated the highest discriminatory accuracy with AUC (0.80 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76 to 0.85)) at 12 months. In calibration analysis, the PATHfx3.0 and OPTIModel models underestimated survival, while the SPRING13 and IOR models overestimated survival. The SORG model exhibited excellent calibration with intercepts of 0.10 (95% CI -0.13 to 0.33) at 12 months. The SORG model also had lower Brier scores than the null score at three and 12 months, indicating good overall performance. Decision curve analysis showed that all five survival prediction models provided greater net benefit than the default strategy of operating on either all or no patients. Rapid growth cancer and low serum albumin levels were associated with three-, six-, and 12-month survival. Conclusion. State-of-art survival prediction models for BM-E (PATHFx3.0, SPRING13, OPTIModel, SORG, and IOR models) are useful clinical tools for orthopaedic surgeons in the decision-making process for the treatment in Asian patients, with SORG models offering the best predictive performance. Rapid growth cancer and serum albumin level are independent, statistically significant factors contributing to survival following surgery of BM-E. Further refinement of survival prediction models will bring about informed and patient-specific treatment of BM-E. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(2):203–211


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 9, Issue 11 | Pages 808 - 820
1 Nov 2020
Trela-Larsen L Kroken G Bartz-Johannessen C Sayers A Aram P McCloskey E Kadirkamanathan V Blom AW Lie SA Furnes ON Wilkinson JM

Aims. To develop and validate patient-centred algorithms that estimate individual risk of death over the first year after elective joint arthroplasty surgery for osteoarthritis. Methods. A total of 763,213 hip and knee joint arthroplasty episodes recorded in the National Joint Registry for England and Wales (NJR) and 105,407 episodes from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register were used to model individual mortality risk over the first year after surgery using flexible parametric survival regression. Results. The one-year mortality rates in the NJR were 10.8 and 8.9 per 1,000 patient-years after hip and knee arthroplasty, respectively. The Norwegian mortality rates were 9.1 and 6.0 per 1,000 patient-years, respectively. The strongest predictors of death in the final models were age, sex, body mass index, and American Society of Anesthesiologists grade. Exposure variables related to the intervention, with the exception of knee arthroplasty type, did not add discrimination over patient factors alone. Discrimination was good in both cohorts, with c-indices above 0.76 for the hip and above 0.70 for the knee. Time-dependent Brier scores indicated appropriate estimation of the mortality rate (≤ 0.01, all models). Conclusion. Simple demographic and clinical information may be used to calculate an individualized estimation for one-year mortality risk after hip or knee arthroplasty (. https://jointcalc.shef.ac.uk. ). These models may be used to provide patients with an estimate of the risk of mortality after joint arthroplasty. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2020;9(11):808–820


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 13, Issue 4 | Pages 184 - 192
18 Apr 2024
Morita A Iida Y Inaba Y Tezuka T Kobayashi N Choe H Ike H Kawakami E

Aims

This study was designed to develop a model for predicting bone mineral density (BMD) loss of the femur after total hip arthroplasty (THA) using artificial intelligence (AI), and to identify factors that influence the prediction. Additionally, we virtually examined the efficacy of administration of bisphosphonate for cases with severe BMD loss based on the predictive model.

Methods

The study included 538 joints that underwent primary THA. The patients were divided into groups using unsupervised time series clustering for five-year BMD loss of Gruen zone 7 postoperatively, and a machine-learning model to predict the BMD loss was developed. Additionally, the predictor for BMD loss was extracted using SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP). The patient-specific efficacy of bisphosphonate, which is the most important categorical predictor for BMD loss, was examined by calculating the change in predictive probability when hypothetically switching between the inclusion and exclusion of bisphosphonate.


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 5, Issue 1 | Pages 9 - 19
16 Jan 2024
Dijkstra H van de Kuit A de Groot TM Canta O Groot OQ Oosterhoff JH Doornberg JN

Aims

Machine-learning (ML) prediction models in orthopaedic trauma hold great promise in assisting clinicians in various tasks, such as personalized risk stratification. However, an overview of current applications and critical appraisal to peer-reviewed guidelines is lacking. The objectives of this study are to 1) provide an overview of current ML prediction models in orthopaedic trauma; 2) evaluate the completeness of reporting following the Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (TRIPOD) statement; and 3) assess the risk of bias following the Prediction model Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST) tool.

Methods

A systematic search screening 3,252 studies identified 45 ML-based prediction models in orthopaedic trauma up to January 2023. The TRIPOD statement assessed transparent reporting and the PROBAST tool the risk of bias.


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 13, Issue 3 | Pages 18 - 20
3 Jun 2024

The June 2024 Hip & Pelvis Roundup360 looks at: Machine learning did not outperform conventional competing risk modelling to predict revision arthroplasty; Unravelling the risks: incidence and reoperation rates for femoral fractures post-total hip arthroplasty; Spinal versus general anaesthesia for hip arthroscopy: a COVID-19 pandemic- and opioid epidemic-driven study; Development and validation of a deep-learning model to predict total hip arthroplasty on radiographs; Ambulatory centres lead in same-day hip and knee arthroplasty success; Exploring the impact of smokeless tobacco on total hip arthroplasty outcomes: a deeper dive into postoperative complications.


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 12, Issue 9 | Pages 512 - 521
1 Sep 2023
Langenberger B Schrednitzki D Halder AM Busse R Pross CM

Aims

A substantial fraction of patients undergoing knee arthroplasty (KA) or hip arthroplasty (HA) do not achieve an improvement as high as the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), i.e. do not achieve a meaningful improvement. Using three patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), our aim was: 1) to assess machine learning (ML), the simple pre-surgery PROM score, and logistic-regression (LR)-derived performance in their prediction of whether patients undergoing HA or KA achieve an improvement as high or higher than a calculated MCID; and 2) to test whether ML is able to outperform LR or pre-surgery PROM scores in predictive performance.

Methods

MCIDs were derived using the change difference method in a sample of 1,843 HA and 1,546 KA patients. An artificial neural network, a gradient boosting machine, least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression, ridge regression, elastic net, random forest, LR, and pre-surgery PROM scores were applied to predict MCID for the following PROMs: EuroQol five-dimension, five-level questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L), EQ visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS), Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function Short-form (HOOS-PS), and Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function Short-form (KOOS-PS).


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. 102-B, Issue 12 | Pages 1752 - 1759
1 Dec 2020
Tsuda Y Tsoi K Stevenson JD Laitinen M Ferguson PC Wunder JS Griffin AM van de Sande MAJ van Praag V Leithner A Fujiwara T Yasunaga H Matsui H Parry MC Jeys LM

Aims

Our aim was to develop and validate nomograms that would predict the cumulative incidence of sarcoma-specific death (CISSD) and disease progression (CIDP) in patients with localized high-grade primary central and dedifferentiated chondrosarcoma.

Methods

The study population consisted of 391 patients from two international sarcoma centres (development cohort) who had undergone definitive surgery for a localized high-grade (histological grade II or III) conventional primary central chondrosarcoma or dedifferentiated chondrosarcoma. Disease progression captured the first event of either metastasis or local recurrence. An independent cohort of 221 patients from three additional hospitals was used for external validation. Two nomograms were internally and externally validated for discrimination (c-index) and calibration plot.