Cargando…
Artificial Learning and Machine Learning Applications in Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review
OBJECTIVES: This current systematic review sought to identify and evaluate all current research-based spine surgery applications of AI/ML in optimizing preoperative patient selection, as well as predicting and managing postoperative outcomes and complications. METHODS: A comprehensive search of publ...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9393994/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35227128 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/21925682211049164 |
_version_ | 1784771390521475072 |
---|---|
author | Lopez, Cesar D. Boddapati, Venkat Lombardi, Joseph M. Lee, Nathan J. Mathew, Justin Danford, Nicholas C. Iyer, Rajiv R. Dyrszka, Marc D. Sardar, Zeeshan M. Lenke, Lawrence G. Lehman, Ronald A. |
author_facet | Lopez, Cesar D. Boddapati, Venkat Lombardi, Joseph M. Lee, Nathan J. Mathew, Justin Danford, Nicholas C. Iyer, Rajiv R. Dyrszka, Marc D. Sardar, Zeeshan M. Lenke, Lawrence G. Lehman, Ronald A. |
author_sort | Lopez, Cesar D. |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: This current systematic review sought to identify and evaluate all current research-based spine surgery applications of AI/ML in optimizing preoperative patient selection, as well as predicting and managing postoperative outcomes and complications. METHODS: A comprehensive search of publications was conducted through the EMBASE, Medline, and PubMed databases using relevant keywords to maximize the sensitivity of the search. No limits were placed on level of evidence or timing of the study. Findings were reported according to the PRISMA guidelines RESULTS: After application of inclusion and exclusion criteria, 41 studies were included in this review. Bayesian networks had the highest average AUC (.80), and neural networks had the best accuracy (83.0%), sensitivity (81.5%), and specificity (71.8%). Preoperative planning/cost prediction models (.89,82.2%) and discharge/length of stay models (.80,78.0%) each reported significantly higher average AUC and accuracy compared to readmissions/reoperation prediction models (.67,70.2%) (P < .001, P = .005, respectively). Model performance also significantly varied across postoperative management applications for average AUC and accuracy values (P < .001, P < .027, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Generally, authors of the reviewed studies concluded that AI/ML offers a potentially beneficial tool for providers to optimize patient care and improve cost-efficiency. More specifically, AI/ML models performed best, on average, when optimizing preoperative patient selection and planning and predicting costs, hospital discharge, and length of stay. However, models were not as accurate in predicting postoperative complications, adverse events, and readmissions and reoperations. An understanding of AI/ML-based applications is becoming increasingly important, particularly in spine surgery, as the volume of reported literature, technology accessibility, and clinical applications continue to rapidly expand. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9393994 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | SAGE Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-93939942022-08-23 Artificial Learning and Machine Learning Applications in Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review Lopez, Cesar D. Boddapati, Venkat Lombardi, Joseph M. Lee, Nathan J. Mathew, Justin Danford, Nicholas C. Iyer, Rajiv R. Dyrszka, Marc D. Sardar, Zeeshan M. Lenke, Lawrence G. Lehman, Ronald A. Global Spine J Review Articles OBJECTIVES: This current systematic review sought to identify and evaluate all current research-based spine surgery applications of AI/ML in optimizing preoperative patient selection, as well as predicting and managing postoperative outcomes and complications. METHODS: A comprehensive search of publications was conducted through the EMBASE, Medline, and PubMed databases using relevant keywords to maximize the sensitivity of the search. No limits were placed on level of evidence or timing of the study. Findings were reported according to the PRISMA guidelines RESULTS: After application of inclusion and exclusion criteria, 41 studies were included in this review. Bayesian networks had the highest average AUC (.80), and neural networks had the best accuracy (83.0%), sensitivity (81.5%), and specificity (71.8%). Preoperative planning/cost prediction models (.89,82.2%) and discharge/length of stay models (.80,78.0%) each reported significantly higher average AUC and accuracy compared to readmissions/reoperation prediction models (.67,70.2%) (P < .001, P = .005, respectively). Model performance also significantly varied across postoperative management applications for average AUC and accuracy values (P < .001, P < .027, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Generally, authors of the reviewed studies concluded that AI/ML offers a potentially beneficial tool for providers to optimize patient care and improve cost-efficiency. More specifically, AI/ML models performed best, on average, when optimizing preoperative patient selection and planning and predicting costs, hospital discharge, and length of stay. However, models were not as accurate in predicting postoperative complications, adverse events, and readmissions and reoperations. An understanding of AI/ML-based applications is becoming increasingly important, particularly in spine surgery, as the volume of reported literature, technology accessibility, and clinical applications continue to rapidly expand. SAGE Publications 2022-02-28 2022-09 /pmc/articles/PMC9393994/ /pubmed/35227128 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/21925682211049164 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work as published without adaptation or alteration, without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage). |
spellingShingle | Review Articles Lopez, Cesar D. Boddapati, Venkat Lombardi, Joseph M. Lee, Nathan J. Mathew, Justin Danford, Nicholas C. Iyer, Rajiv R. Dyrszka, Marc D. Sardar, Zeeshan M. Lenke, Lawrence G. Lehman, Ronald A. Artificial Learning and Machine Learning Applications in Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review |
title | Artificial Learning and Machine Learning Applications in Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review |
title_full | Artificial Learning and Machine Learning Applications in Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review |
title_fullStr | Artificial Learning and Machine Learning Applications in Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review |
title_full_unstemmed | Artificial Learning and Machine Learning Applications in Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review |
title_short | Artificial Learning and Machine Learning Applications in Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review |
title_sort | artificial learning and machine learning applications in spine surgery: a systematic review |
topic | Review Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9393994/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35227128 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/21925682211049164 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT lopezcesard artificiallearningandmachinelearningapplicationsinspinesurgeryasystematicreview AT boddapativenkat artificiallearningandmachinelearningapplicationsinspinesurgeryasystematicreview AT lombardijosephm artificiallearningandmachinelearningapplicationsinspinesurgeryasystematicreview AT leenathanj artificiallearningandmachinelearningapplicationsinspinesurgeryasystematicreview AT mathewjustin artificiallearningandmachinelearningapplicationsinspinesurgeryasystematicreview AT danfordnicholasc artificiallearningandmachinelearningapplicationsinspinesurgeryasystematicreview AT iyerrajivr artificiallearningandmachinelearningapplicationsinspinesurgeryasystematicreview AT dyrszkamarcd artificiallearningandmachinelearningapplicationsinspinesurgeryasystematicreview AT sardarzeeshanm artificiallearningandmachinelearningapplicationsinspinesurgeryasystematicreview AT lenkelawrenceg artificiallearningandmachinelearningapplicationsinspinesurgeryasystematicreview AT lehmanronalda artificiallearningandmachinelearningapplicationsinspinesurgeryasystematicreview |