Cargando…

Machine learning to guide clinical decision-making in abdominal surgery—a systematic literature review

PURPOSE: An indication for surgical therapy includes balancing benefits against risk, which remains a key task in all surgical disciplines. Decisions are oftentimes based on clinical experience while guidelines lack evidence-based background. Various medical fields capitalized the application of mac...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Henn, Jonas, Buness, Andreas, Schmid, Matthias, Kalff, Jörg C., Matthaei, Hanno
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8847247/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34716472
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00423-021-02348-w
_version_ 1784652011371757568
author Henn, Jonas
Buness, Andreas
Schmid, Matthias
Kalff, Jörg C.
Matthaei, Hanno
author_facet Henn, Jonas
Buness, Andreas
Schmid, Matthias
Kalff, Jörg C.
Matthaei, Hanno
author_sort Henn, Jonas
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: An indication for surgical therapy includes balancing benefits against risk, which remains a key task in all surgical disciplines. Decisions are oftentimes based on clinical experience while guidelines lack evidence-based background. Various medical fields capitalized the application of machine learning (ML), and preliminary research suggests promising implications in surgeons’ workflow. Hence, we evaluated ML’s contemporary and possible future role in clinical decision-making (CDM) focusing on abdominal surgery. METHODS: Using the PICO framework, relevant keywords and research questions were identified. Following the PRISMA guidelines, a systemic search strategy in the PubMed database was conducted. Results were filtered by distinct criteria and selected articles were manually full text reviewed. RESULTS: Literature review revealed 4,396 articles, of which 47 matched the search criteria. The mean number of patients included was 55,843. A total of eight distinct ML techniques were evaluated whereas AUROC was applied by most authors for comparing ML predictions vs. conventional CDM routines. Most authors (N = 30/47, 63.8%) stated ML’s superiority in the prediction of benefits and risks of surgery. The identification of highly relevant parameters to be integrated into algorithms allowing a more precise prognosis was emphasized as the main advantage of ML in CDM. CONCLUSIONS: A potential value of ML for surgical decision-making was demonstrated in several scientific articles. However, the low number of publications with only few collaborative studies between surgeons and computer scientists underpins the early phase of this highly promising field. Interdisciplinary research initiatives combining existing clinical datasets and emerging techniques of data processing may likely improve CDM in abdominal surgery in the future.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8847247
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88472472022-02-23 Machine learning to guide clinical decision-making in abdominal surgery—a systematic literature review Henn, Jonas Buness, Andreas Schmid, Matthias Kalff, Jörg C. Matthaei, Hanno Langenbecks Arch Surg Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses PURPOSE: An indication for surgical therapy includes balancing benefits against risk, which remains a key task in all surgical disciplines. Decisions are oftentimes based on clinical experience while guidelines lack evidence-based background. Various medical fields capitalized the application of machine learning (ML), and preliminary research suggests promising implications in surgeons’ workflow. Hence, we evaluated ML’s contemporary and possible future role in clinical decision-making (CDM) focusing on abdominal surgery. METHODS: Using the PICO framework, relevant keywords and research questions were identified. Following the PRISMA guidelines, a systemic search strategy in the PubMed database was conducted. Results were filtered by distinct criteria and selected articles were manually full text reviewed. RESULTS: Literature review revealed 4,396 articles, of which 47 matched the search criteria. The mean number of patients included was 55,843. A total of eight distinct ML techniques were evaluated whereas AUROC was applied by most authors for comparing ML predictions vs. conventional CDM routines. Most authors (N = 30/47, 63.8%) stated ML’s superiority in the prediction of benefits and risks of surgery. The identification of highly relevant parameters to be integrated into algorithms allowing a more precise prognosis was emphasized as the main advantage of ML in CDM. CONCLUSIONS: A potential value of ML for surgical decision-making was demonstrated in several scientific articles. However, the low number of publications with only few collaborative studies between surgeons and computer scientists underpins the early phase of this highly promising field. Interdisciplinary research initiatives combining existing clinical datasets and emerging techniques of data processing may likely improve CDM in abdominal surgery in the future. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021-10-29 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC8847247/ /pubmed/34716472 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00423-021-02348-w Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis 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 licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence 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 licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses
Henn, Jonas
Buness, Andreas
Schmid, Matthias
Kalff, Jörg C.
Matthaei, Hanno
Machine learning to guide clinical decision-making in abdominal surgery—a systematic literature review
title Machine learning to guide clinical decision-making in abdominal surgery—a systematic literature review
title_full Machine learning to guide clinical decision-making in abdominal surgery—a systematic literature review
title_fullStr Machine learning to guide clinical decision-making in abdominal surgery—a systematic literature review
title_full_unstemmed Machine learning to guide clinical decision-making in abdominal surgery—a systematic literature review
title_short Machine learning to guide clinical decision-making in abdominal surgery—a systematic literature review
title_sort machine learning to guide clinical decision-making in abdominal surgery—a systematic literature review
topic Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8847247/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34716472
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00423-021-02348-w
work_keys_str_mv AT hennjonas machinelearningtoguideclinicaldecisionmakinginabdominalsurgeryasystematicliteraturereview
AT bunessandreas machinelearningtoguideclinicaldecisionmakinginabdominalsurgeryasystematicliteraturereview
AT schmidmatthias machinelearningtoguideclinicaldecisionmakinginabdominalsurgeryasystematicliteraturereview
AT kalffjorgc machinelearningtoguideclinicaldecisionmakinginabdominalsurgeryasystematicliteraturereview
AT matthaeihanno machinelearningtoguideclinicaldecisionmakinginabdominalsurgeryasystematicliteraturereview