Development and Internal Validation of Machine Learning to Predict Postoperative Worse Functional Status after Surgical Treatment for Thoracic Spinal Stenosis.

IF 3.1 4区 医学 Q1 Medicine Medical Science Monitor Pub Date : 2024-09-26 DOI:10.12659/MSM.945310
Tun Liu, Jia Li, Huaguang Qi, Bin Guo, Songchuan Zhao, Baoping Zhang, Langbo Li, Gang Wu, Gang Wang
{"title":"Development and Internal Validation of Machine Learning to Predict Postoperative Worse Functional Status after Surgical Treatment for Thoracic Spinal Stenosis.","authors":"Tun Liu, Jia Li, Huaguang Qi, Bin Guo, Songchuan Zhao, Baoping Zhang, Langbo Li, Gang Wu, Gang Wang","doi":"10.12659/MSM.945310","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>BACKGROUND The objective of this study was to develop and validate machine learning (ML) algorithms to predict the 30-day and 6-month risk of deteriorating functional status following surgical treatment for thoracic spinal stenosis (TSS). We aimed to provide surgeons with tools to identify patients with TSS who have a higher risk of postoperative functional decline. MATERIAL AND METHODS The records of 327 patients with TSS who completed both follow-up visits were analyzed. Our primary endpoint was the dichotomized change in the perioperative Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score, categorized based on whether it deteriorated or not. The models were developed using Naïve Bays, LightGBM, XGBoost, logistic regression, and random forest classification models. The model performance was assessed by accuracy and the c-statistic. ML algorithms were trained, optimized, and tested. RESULTS The best-performing algorithms for predicting functional decline at 30 days and 6 months after TSS surgery were XGBoost (accuracy=88.17%, c-statistic=0.83) and Naïve Bays (accuracy=86.03%, c-statistic=0.80). Both algorithms presented good calibration and discrimination in our testing data. We identified several significant predictors, including poor quality of intraoperative SSEP/MEP baseline, poor quality of preoperative SSEP, duration of symptoms, operated level, and motor dysfunction of the lower extremity. CONCLUSIONS The best-performing algorithms for predicting functional decline at 30 days and 6 months after TSS surgery were XGBoost (accuracy=88.17%, c-statistic=0.83) and Naïve Bays (accuracy=86.03%, c-statistic=0.80). Both algorithms presented good calibration and discrimination in our testing data. We identified several significant predictors, including poor quality of intraoperative SSEP/MEP baseline, poor quality of preoperative SSEP, duration of symptoms, operated level, and motor dysfunction of the lower extremity.</p>","PeriodicalId":48888,"journal":{"name":"Medical Science Monitor","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11443983/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Science Monitor","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12659/MSM.945310","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BACKGROUND The objective of this study was to develop and validate machine learning (ML) algorithms to predict the 30-day and 6-month risk of deteriorating functional status following surgical treatment for thoracic spinal stenosis (TSS). We aimed to provide surgeons with tools to identify patients with TSS who have a higher risk of postoperative functional decline. MATERIAL AND METHODS The records of 327 patients with TSS who completed both follow-up visits were analyzed. Our primary endpoint was the dichotomized change in the perioperative Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score, categorized based on whether it deteriorated or not. The models were developed using Naïve Bays, LightGBM, XGBoost, logistic regression, and random forest classification models. The model performance was assessed by accuracy and the c-statistic. ML algorithms were trained, optimized, and tested. RESULTS The best-performing algorithms for predicting functional decline at 30 days and 6 months after TSS surgery were XGBoost (accuracy=88.17%, c-statistic=0.83) and Naïve Bays (accuracy=86.03%, c-statistic=0.80). Both algorithms presented good calibration and discrimination in our testing data. We identified several significant predictors, including poor quality of intraoperative SSEP/MEP baseline, poor quality of preoperative SSEP, duration of symptoms, operated level, and motor dysfunction of the lower extremity. CONCLUSIONS The best-performing algorithms for predicting functional decline at 30 days and 6 months after TSS surgery were XGBoost (accuracy=88.17%, c-statistic=0.83) and Naïve Bays (accuracy=86.03%, c-statistic=0.80). Both algorithms presented good calibration and discrimination in our testing data. We identified several significant predictors, including poor quality of intraoperative SSEP/MEP baseline, poor quality of preoperative SSEP, duration of symptoms, operated level, and motor dysfunction of the lower extremity.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
通过机器学习预测胸椎管狭窄症手术治疗后功能状况恶化的开发和内部验证。
背景 本研究旨在开发和验证机器学习(ML)算法,以预测胸椎管狭窄症(TSS)手术治疗后 30 天和 6 个月功能状态恶化的风险。我们旨在为外科医生提供工具,以识别术后功能衰退风险较高的胸椎管狭窄症患者。材料和方法 对完成两次随访的 327 名 TSS 患者的记录进行了分析。我们的主要终点是围手术期日本骨科协会(JOA)评分的二分法变化,根据评分是否恶化进行分类。模型采用 Naïve Bays、LightGBM、XGBoost、逻辑回归和随机森林分类模型开发。模型性能通过准确率和 c 统计量进行评估。对 ML 算法进行了训练、优化和测试。结果 预测 TSS 术后 30 天和 6 个月功能衰退的最佳算法是 XGBoost(准确率=88.17%,c 统计量=0.83)和 Naïve Bays(准确率=86.03%,c 统计量=0.80)。在我们的测试数据中,这两种算法都表现出了良好的校准和辨别能力。我们发现了几个重要的预测因素,包括术中 SSEP/MEP 基线质量差、术前 SSEP 质量差、症状持续时间、手术级别和下肢运动功能障碍。结论 预测 TSS 术后 30 天和 6 个月功能下降的最佳算法是 XGBoost(准确率=88.17%,c-统计量=0.83)和 Naïve Bays(准确率=86.03%,c-统计量=0.80)。在我们的测试数据中,这两种算法都表现出了良好的校准和辨别能力。我们发现了几个重要的预测因素,包括术中 SSEP/MEP 基线质量差、术前 SSEP 质量差、症状持续时间、手术级别和下肢运动功能障碍。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Medical Science Monitor
Medical Science Monitor MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
3.20%
发文量
514
审稿时长
3.0 months
期刊介绍: Medical Science Monitor (MSM) established in 1995 is an international, peer-reviewed scientific journal which publishes original articles in Clinical Medicine and related disciplines such as Epidemiology and Population Studies, Product Investigations, Development of Laboratory Techniques :: Diagnostics and Medical Technology which enable presentation of research or review works in overlapping areas of medicine and technology such us (but not limited to): medical diagnostics, medical imaging systems, computer simulation of health and disease processes, new medical devices, etc. Reviews and Special Reports - papers may be accepted on the basis that they provide a systematic, critical and up-to-date overview of literature pertaining to research or clinical topics. Meta-analyses are considered as reviews. A special attention will be paid to a teaching value of a review paper. Medical Science Monitor is internationally indexed in Thomson-Reuters Web of Science, Journals Citation Report (JCR), Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI), Index Medicus MEDLINE, PubMed, PMC, EMBASE/Excerpta Medica, Chemical Abstracts CAS and Index Copernicus.
期刊最新文献
Depressive Symptoms in Multiple Sclerosis: Links to Body Composition, Physical Activity, and Functional Ability. Green Synthesis of Dracocephalum kotschyi-Coated Silver Nanoparticles: Antimicrobial, Antioxidant, and Anticancer Potentials. Prevalence and Determinants of Self-Medication Among Pregnant Women at an Antenatal Clinic at Soba Teaching Hospital, Sudan: A Cross-Sectional Analysis. Editorial: Potentials and Pitfalls in Targeting Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 (GLP-1) in the Management of Increasing Levels of Obesity. Retracted: MicroRNA-495 Confers Increased Sensitivity to Chemotherapeutic Agents in Gastric Cancer via the Mammalian Target of Rapamycin (mTOR) Signaling Pathway by Interacting with Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 (ERBB2).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1