Cargando…
Machine learning algorithm to predict anterior cruciate ligament revision demonstrates external validity
PURPOSE: External validation of machine learning predictive models is achieved through evaluation of model performance on different groups of patients than were used for algorithm development. This important step is uncommonly performed, inhibiting clinical translation of newly developed models. Mac...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8866372/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34973096 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00167-021-06828-w |
_version_ | 1784655821210124288 |
---|---|
author | Martin, R. Kyle Wastvedt, Solvejg Pareek, Ayoosh Persson, Andreas Visnes, Håvard Fenstad, Anne Marie Moatshe, Gilbert Wolfson, Julian Lind, Martin Engebretsen, Lars |
author_facet | Martin, R. Kyle Wastvedt, Solvejg Pareek, Ayoosh Persson, Andreas Visnes, Håvard Fenstad, Anne Marie Moatshe, Gilbert Wolfson, Julian Lind, Martin Engebretsen, Lars |
author_sort | Martin, R. Kyle |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: External validation of machine learning predictive models is achieved through evaluation of model performance on different groups of patients than were used for algorithm development. This important step is uncommonly performed, inhibiting clinical translation of newly developed models. Machine learning analysis of the Norwegian Knee Ligament Register (NKLR) recently led to the development of a tool capable of estimating the risk of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) revision (https://swastvedt.shinyapps.io/calculator_rev/). The purpose of this study was to determine the external validity of the NKLR model by assessing algorithm performance when applied to patients from the Danish Knee Ligament Registry (DKLR). METHODS: The primary outcome measure of the NKLR model was probability of revision ACL reconstruction within 1, 2, and/or 5 years. For external validation, all DKLR patients with complete data for the five variables required for NKLR prediction were included. The five variables included graft choice, femur fixation device, KOOS QOL score at surgery, years from injury to surgery, and age at surgery. Predicted revision probabilities were calculated for all DKLR patients. The model performance was assessed using the same metrics as the NKLR study: concordance and calibration. RESULTS: In total, 10,922 DKLR patients were included for analysis. Average follow-up time or time-to-revision was 8.4 (± 4.3) years and overall revision rate was 6.9%. Surgical technique trends (i.e., graft choice and fixation devices) and injury characteristics (i.e., concomitant meniscus and cartilage pathology) were dissimilar between registries. The model produced similar concordance when applied to the DKLR population compared to the original NKLR test data (DKLR: 0.68; NKLR: 0.68–0.69). Calibration was poorer for the DKLR population at one and five years post primary surgery but similar to the NKLR at two years. CONCLUSION: The NKLR machine learning algorithm demonstrated similar performance when applied to patients from the DKLR, suggesting that it is valid for application outside of the initial patient population. This represents the first machine learning model for predicting revision ACL reconstruction that has been externally validated. Clinicians can use this in-clinic calculator to estimate revision risk at a patient specific level when discussing outcome expectations pre-operatively. While encouraging, it should be noted that the performance of the model on patients undergoing ACL reconstruction outside of Scandinavia remains unknown. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00167-021-06828-w. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8866372 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-88663722022-03-02 Machine learning algorithm to predict anterior cruciate ligament revision demonstrates external validity Martin, R. Kyle Wastvedt, Solvejg Pareek, Ayoosh Persson, Andreas Visnes, Håvard Fenstad, Anne Marie Moatshe, Gilbert Wolfson, Julian Lind, Martin Engebretsen, Lars Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Knee PURPOSE: External validation of machine learning predictive models is achieved through evaluation of model performance on different groups of patients than were used for algorithm development. This important step is uncommonly performed, inhibiting clinical translation of newly developed models. Machine learning analysis of the Norwegian Knee Ligament Register (NKLR) recently led to the development of a tool capable of estimating the risk of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) revision (https://swastvedt.shinyapps.io/calculator_rev/). The purpose of this study was to determine the external validity of the NKLR model by assessing algorithm performance when applied to patients from the Danish Knee Ligament Registry (DKLR). METHODS: The primary outcome measure of the NKLR model was probability of revision ACL reconstruction within 1, 2, and/or 5 years. For external validation, all DKLR patients with complete data for the five variables required for NKLR prediction were included. The five variables included graft choice, femur fixation device, KOOS QOL score at surgery, years from injury to surgery, and age at surgery. Predicted revision probabilities were calculated for all DKLR patients. The model performance was assessed using the same metrics as the NKLR study: concordance and calibration. RESULTS: In total, 10,922 DKLR patients were included for analysis. Average follow-up time or time-to-revision was 8.4 (± 4.3) years and overall revision rate was 6.9%. Surgical technique trends (i.e., graft choice and fixation devices) and injury characteristics (i.e., concomitant meniscus and cartilage pathology) were dissimilar between registries. The model produced similar concordance when applied to the DKLR population compared to the original NKLR test data (DKLR: 0.68; NKLR: 0.68–0.69). Calibration was poorer for the DKLR population at one and five years post primary surgery but similar to the NKLR at two years. CONCLUSION: The NKLR machine learning algorithm demonstrated similar performance when applied to patients from the DKLR, suggesting that it is valid for application outside of the initial patient population. This represents the first machine learning model for predicting revision ACL reconstruction that has been externally validated. Clinicians can use this in-clinic calculator to estimate revision risk at a patient specific level when discussing outcome expectations pre-operatively. While encouraging, it should be noted that the performance of the model on patients undergoing ACL reconstruction outside of Scandinavia remains unknown. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00167-021-06828-w. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022-01-01 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC8866372/ /pubmed/34973096 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00167-021-06828-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 | Knee Martin, R. Kyle Wastvedt, Solvejg Pareek, Ayoosh Persson, Andreas Visnes, Håvard Fenstad, Anne Marie Moatshe, Gilbert Wolfson, Julian Lind, Martin Engebretsen, Lars Machine learning algorithm to predict anterior cruciate ligament revision demonstrates external validity |
title | Machine learning algorithm to predict anterior cruciate ligament revision demonstrates external validity |
title_full | Machine learning algorithm to predict anterior cruciate ligament revision demonstrates external validity |
title_fullStr | Machine learning algorithm to predict anterior cruciate ligament revision demonstrates external validity |
title_full_unstemmed | Machine learning algorithm to predict anterior cruciate ligament revision demonstrates external validity |
title_short | Machine learning algorithm to predict anterior cruciate ligament revision demonstrates external validity |
title_sort | machine learning algorithm to predict anterior cruciate ligament revision demonstrates external validity |
topic | Knee |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8866372/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34973096 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00167-021-06828-w |
work_keys_str_mv | AT martinrkyle machinelearningalgorithmtopredictanteriorcruciateligamentrevisiondemonstratesexternalvalidity AT wastvedtsolvejg machinelearningalgorithmtopredictanteriorcruciateligamentrevisiondemonstratesexternalvalidity AT pareekayoosh machinelearningalgorithmtopredictanteriorcruciateligamentrevisiondemonstratesexternalvalidity AT perssonandreas machinelearningalgorithmtopredictanteriorcruciateligamentrevisiondemonstratesexternalvalidity AT visneshavard machinelearningalgorithmtopredictanteriorcruciateligamentrevisiondemonstratesexternalvalidity AT fenstadannemarie machinelearningalgorithmtopredictanteriorcruciateligamentrevisiondemonstratesexternalvalidity AT moatshegilbert machinelearningalgorithmtopredictanteriorcruciateligamentrevisiondemonstratesexternalvalidity AT wolfsonjulian machinelearningalgorithmtopredictanteriorcruciateligamentrevisiondemonstratesexternalvalidity AT lindmartin machinelearningalgorithmtopredictanteriorcruciateligamentrevisiondemonstratesexternalvalidity AT engebretsenlars machinelearningalgorithmtopredictanteriorcruciateligamentrevisiondemonstratesexternalvalidity |