Cargando…
Machine learning in vascular surgery: a systematic review and critical appraisal
Machine learning (ML) is a rapidly advancing field with increasing utility in health care. We conducted a systematic review and critical appraisal of ML applications in vascular surgery. MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched from inception to March 1, 2021. Study screening, data extrac...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8770468/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35046493 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41746-021-00552-y |
_version_ | 1784635379678183424 |
---|---|
author | Li, Ben Feridooni, Tiam Cuen-Ojeda, Cesar Kishibe, Teruko de Mestral, Charles Mamdani, Muhammad Al-Omran, Mohammed |
author_facet | Li, Ben Feridooni, Tiam Cuen-Ojeda, Cesar Kishibe, Teruko de Mestral, Charles Mamdani, Muhammad Al-Omran, Mohammed |
author_sort | Li, Ben |
collection | PubMed |
description | Machine learning (ML) is a rapidly advancing field with increasing utility in health care. We conducted a systematic review and critical appraisal of ML applications in vascular surgery. MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched from inception to March 1, 2021. Study screening, data extraction, and quality assessment were performed by two independent reviewers, with a third author resolving discrepancies. All original studies reporting ML applications in vascular surgery were included. Publication trends, disease conditions, methodologies, and outcomes were summarized. Critical appraisal was conducted using the PROBAST risk-of-bias and TRIPOD reporting adherence tools. We included 212 studies from a pool of 2235 unique articles. ML techniques were used for diagnosis, prognosis, and image segmentation in carotid stenosis, aortic aneurysm/dissection, peripheral artery disease, diabetic foot ulcer, venous disease, and renal artery stenosis. The number of publications on ML in vascular surgery increased from 1 (1991–1996) to 118 (2016–2021). Most studies were retrospective and single center, with no randomized controlled trials. The median area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) was 0.88 (range 0.61–1.00), with 79.5% [62/78] studies reporting AUROC ≥ 0.80. Out of 22 studies comparing ML techniques to existing prediction tools, clinicians, or traditional regression models, 20 performed better and 2 performed similarly. Overall, 94.8% (201/212) studies had high risk-of-bias and adherence to reporting standards was poor with a rate of 41.4%. Despite improvements over time, study quality and reporting remain inadequate. Future studies should consider standardized tools such as PROBAST and TRIPOD to improve study quality and clinical applicability. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8770468 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-87704682022-02-04 Machine learning in vascular surgery: a systematic review and critical appraisal Li, Ben Feridooni, Tiam Cuen-Ojeda, Cesar Kishibe, Teruko de Mestral, Charles Mamdani, Muhammad Al-Omran, Mohammed NPJ Digit Med Review Article Machine learning (ML) is a rapidly advancing field with increasing utility in health care. We conducted a systematic review and critical appraisal of ML applications in vascular surgery. MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched from inception to March 1, 2021. Study screening, data extraction, and quality assessment were performed by two independent reviewers, with a third author resolving discrepancies. All original studies reporting ML applications in vascular surgery were included. Publication trends, disease conditions, methodologies, and outcomes were summarized. Critical appraisal was conducted using the PROBAST risk-of-bias and TRIPOD reporting adherence tools. We included 212 studies from a pool of 2235 unique articles. ML techniques were used for diagnosis, prognosis, and image segmentation in carotid stenosis, aortic aneurysm/dissection, peripheral artery disease, diabetic foot ulcer, venous disease, and renal artery stenosis. The number of publications on ML in vascular surgery increased from 1 (1991–1996) to 118 (2016–2021). Most studies were retrospective and single center, with no randomized controlled trials. The median area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) was 0.88 (range 0.61–1.00), with 79.5% [62/78] studies reporting AUROC ≥ 0.80. Out of 22 studies comparing ML techniques to existing prediction tools, clinicians, or traditional regression models, 20 performed better and 2 performed similarly. Overall, 94.8% (201/212) studies had high risk-of-bias and adherence to reporting standards was poor with a rate of 41.4%. Despite improvements over time, study quality and reporting remain inadequate. Future studies should consider standardized tools such as PROBAST and TRIPOD to improve study quality and clinical applicability. Nature Publishing Group UK 2022-01-19 /pmc/articles/PMC8770468/ /pubmed/35046493 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41746-021-00552-y Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Review Article Li, Ben Feridooni, Tiam Cuen-Ojeda, Cesar Kishibe, Teruko de Mestral, Charles Mamdani, Muhammad Al-Omran, Mohammed Machine learning in vascular surgery: a systematic review and critical appraisal |
title | Machine learning in vascular surgery: a systematic review and critical appraisal |
title_full | Machine learning in vascular surgery: a systematic review and critical appraisal |
title_fullStr | Machine learning in vascular surgery: a systematic review and critical appraisal |
title_full_unstemmed | Machine learning in vascular surgery: a systematic review and critical appraisal |
title_short | Machine learning in vascular surgery: a systematic review and critical appraisal |
title_sort | machine learning in vascular surgery: a systematic review and critical appraisal |
topic | Review Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8770468/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35046493 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41746-021-00552-y |
work_keys_str_mv | AT liben machinelearninginvascularsurgeryasystematicreviewandcriticalappraisal AT feridoonitiam machinelearninginvascularsurgeryasystematicreviewandcriticalappraisal AT cuenojedacesar machinelearninginvascularsurgeryasystematicreviewandcriticalappraisal AT kishibeteruko machinelearninginvascularsurgeryasystematicreviewandcriticalappraisal AT demestralcharles machinelearninginvascularsurgeryasystematicreviewandcriticalappraisal AT mamdanimuhammad machinelearninginvascularsurgeryasystematicreviewandcriticalappraisal AT alomranmohammed machinelearninginvascularsurgeryasystematicreviewandcriticalappraisal |