Neurospine

THE KOREAN SPINAL NEUROSURGERY SOCIETY (대한척추신경외과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Predicting Surgical Complications in Adult Patients Undergoing Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Using Machine Learning

  • Arvind, Varun (Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai) ;
  • Kim, Jun S. (Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai) ;
  • Oermann, Eric K. (Department of Neurosurgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai) ;
  • Kaji, Deepak (Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai) ;
  • Cho, Samuel K. (Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai)
  • Received : 2018.10.15
  • Accepted : 2018.11.27
  • Published : 2018.12.31
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: Machine learning algorithms excel at leveraging big data to identify complex patterns that can be used to aid in clinical decision-making. The objective of this study is to demonstrate the performance of machine learning models in predicting postoperative complications following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). Methods: Artificial neural network (ANN), logistic regression (LR), support vector machine (SVM), and random forest decision tree (RF) models were trained on a multicenter data set of patients undergoing ACDF to predict surgical complications based on readily available patient data. Following training, these models were compared to the predictive capability of American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status classification. Results: A total of 20,879 patients were identified as having undergone ACDF. Following exclusion criteria, patients were divided into 14,615 patients for training and 6,264 for testing data sets. ANN and LR consistently outperformed ASA physical status classification in predicting every complication (p < 0.05). The ANN outperformed LR in predicting venous thromboembolism, wound complication, and mortality (p < 0.05). The SVM and RF models were no better than random chance at predicting any of the postoperative complications (p < 0.05). Conclusion: ANN and LR algorithms outperform ASA physical status classification for predicting individual postoperative complications. Additionally, neural networks have greater sensitivity than LR when predicting mortality and wound complications. With the growing size of medical data, the training of machine learning on these large datasets promises to improve risk prognostication, with the ability of continuously learning making them excellent tools in complex clinical scenarios.

Keywords

References

  1. Cruz JA, Wishart DS. Applications of machine learning in cancer prediction and prognosis. Cancer Inform 2007;2:59-77.
  2. Dreiseitl S, Ohno-Machado L. Logistic regression and artificial neural network classification models: a methodology review. J Biomed Inform 2002;35:352-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1532-0464(03)00034-0
  3. Hopfield JJ. Artificial neural networks. IEEE Circuit Device Mag 1988;4:3-10.
  4. Baird EO, Egorova NN, McAnany SJ, et al. National trends in outpatient surgical treatment of degenerative cervical spine disease. Global Spine J 2014;4:143-50. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0034-1376917
  5. Klein GR, Vaccaro AR, Albert TJ. Health outcome assessment before and after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for radiculopathy: a prospective analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2000;25:801-3. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200004010-00007
  6. Yue WM, Brodner W, Highland TR. Long-term results after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with allograft and plating: a 5- to 11-year radiologic and clinical follow-up study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2005;30:2138-44. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.brs.0000180479.63092.17
  7. Marawar S, Girardi FP, Sama AA, et al. National trends in anterior cervical fusion procedures. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2010;35:1454-9. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181bef3cb
  8. Adamson T, Godil SS, Mehrlich M, et al. Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion in the outpatient ambulatory surgery setting compared with the inpatient hospital setting: analysis of 1000 consecutive cases. J Neurosurg Spine 2016;24:878-84. https://doi.org/10.3171/2015.8.SPINE14284
  9. Haibo He, Yang Bai, Garcia EA, et al. ADASYN: Adaptive synthetic sampling approach for imbalanced learning. In: 2008 IEEE International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IEEE World Congress on Computational Intelligence). IEEE;2008:1322-8.
  10. Blum AL, Langley P. Selection of relevant features and examples in machine learning. Artif Intell 1997;97:245-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0004-3702(97)00063-5
  11. Moller AM, Pedersen T, Villebro N, et al. Effect of smoking on early complications after elective orthopaedic surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2003;85:178-81.
  12. Iorio R, Williams KM, Marcantonio AJ, et al. Diabetes mellitus, hemoglobin A1C, and the incidence of total joint arthroplasty infection. J Arthroplasty 2012;27:726-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2011.09.013
  13. Chen S, Anderson MV, Cheng WK, et al. Diabetes associated with increased surgical site infections in spinal arthrodesis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2009;467:1670-3. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-009-0740-y
  14. Van Esbroeck A, Rubinfeld I, Hall B, et al. Quantifying surgical complexity with machine learning: looking beyond patient factors to improve surgical models. Surgery 2014;156:1097-105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2014.04.034
  15. Hu Z, Simon GJ, Arsoniadis EG, et al. Automated detection of postoperative surgical site infections using supervised methods with electronic health record data. Stud Health Technol Inform 2015;216:706-10.
  16. Sohn S, Larson DW, Habermann EB, et al. Detection of clinically important colorectal surgical site infection using Bayesian network. J Surg Res 2017;209:168-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2016.09.058
  17. Bilimoria KY, Liu Y, Paruch JL, et al. Development and evaluation of the universal ACS NSQIP surgical risk calculator: a decision aid and informed consent tool for patients and surgeons. J Am Coll Surg 2013;217:833-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2013.07.385
  18. Krell MM, Wilshusen N, Seeland A, et al. Classifier transfer with data selection strategies for online support vector machine classification with class imbalance. J Neural Eng 2017;14:025003. https://doi.org/10.1088/1741-2552/aa5166
  19. Wang Q, Luo Z, Huang J, et al. A novel ensemble method for imbalanced data learning: bagging of extrapolation-SMOTE SVM. Comput Intell Neurosci 2017;2017:1827016.
  20. Somani S, Di Capua J, Kim JS, et al. Comparing national inpatient sample and national surgical quality improvement program: an independent risk factor analysis for risk stratification in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2017;42:565-72. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000001850
  21. Wang TY, Martin JR, Loriaux DB, et al. Risk assessment and characterization of 30-day perioperative myocardial infarction following spine surgery: a retrospective analysis of 1346 consecutive adult patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2016;41:438-44. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000001249
  22. Tsai JT, Chou JH, Liu TK. Tuning the structure and parameters of a neural network by using hybrid Taguchi-genetic algorithm. IEEE Trans Neural Netw 2006;17:69-80. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNN.2005.860885
  23. Cios KJ, Moore GW. Uniqueness of medical data mining. Artif Intell Med 2002;26:1-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0933-3657(02)00049-0
  24. Weber GM, Mandl KD, Kohane IS. Finding the missing link for big biomedical data. JAMA 2014;311:2479-80.

Cited by

  1. Complications of Spine Surgery in Elderly Japanese Patients: Implications for Future of World Population Aging vol.16, pp.4, 2018, https://doi.org/10.14245/ns.1938184.092
  2. Upper Cervical Surgery, Increased Signal Intensity of the Spinal Cord, and Hypertension as Risk Factors for Dyspnea After Multilevel Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion vol.45, pp.7, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1097/brs.0000000000003329
  3. The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Quality and Safety vol.10, pp.1, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1177/2192568219878133
  4. The Application of Artificial Neural Networks and Logistic Regression in the Evaluation of Risk for Dry Eye after Vitrectomy vol.2020, pp.None, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/1024926
  5. Harnessing Big Data in Neurocritical Care in the Era of Precision Medicine vol.22, pp.5, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11940-020-00622-8
  6. A Review on the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Spinal Diseases vol.14, pp.4, 2018, https://doi.org/10.31616/asj.2020.0147
  7. Comparison of clinical and radiological outcomes in cervical laminoplasty versus laminectomy with fusion in patients with ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament vol.43, pp.5, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10143-019-01174-5
  8. Comparison of the effectiveness and safety of bioactive glass ceramic to allograft bone for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with anterior plate fixation vol.43, pp.5, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10143-019-01225-x
  9. The applications of machine learning in plastic and reconstructive surgery: protocol of a systematic review vol.9, pp.1, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-020-01304-x
  10. Using Predictive Modeling and Machine Learning to Identify Patients Appropriate for Outpatient Anterior Cervical Fusion and Discectomy vol.46, pp.10, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1097/brs.0000000000003865
  11. Neurosurgery and artificial intelligence vol.8, pp.4, 2018, https://doi.org/10.3934/neuroscience.2021025
  12. Applications of Machine Learning in Pediatric Hydrocephalus: A Systematic Review vol.69, pp.8, 2018, https://doi.org/10.4103/0028-3886.332287
  13. TET-dependent GDF7 hypomethylation impairs aqueous humor outflow and serves as a potential therapeutic target in glaucoma vol.29, pp.4, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymthe.2020.12.030
  14. Artificial Intelligence and Robotics in Spine Surgery vol.11, pp.4, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1177/2192568220915718
  15. The diagnostic and prognostic value of artificial intelligence and artificial neural networks in spinal surgery : a narrative review vol.103, pp.9, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620x.103b9.bjj-2021-0192.r1