Data-Driven Approach to Development of a Risk Score for Periprosthetic Joint Infections in Total Joint Arthroplasty Using Electronic Health Records.

IF 3.4 2区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS Journal of Arthroplasty Pub Date : 2024-11-01 DOI:10.1016/j.arth.2024.10.129
Hilal Maradit Kremers, Cody C Wyles, Joshua P Slusser, Thomas J O'Byrne, Elham Sagheb, David G Lewallen, Daniel J Berry, Douglas R Osmon, Sunghwan Sohn, Walter K Kremers
{"title":"Data-Driven Approach to Development of a Risk Score for Periprosthetic Joint Infections in Total Joint Arthroplasty Using Electronic Health Records.","authors":"Hilal Maradit Kremers, Cody C Wyles, Joshua P Slusser, Thomas J O'Byrne, Elham Sagheb, David G Lewallen, Daniel J Berry, Douglas R Osmon, Sunghwan Sohn, Walter K Kremers","doi":"10.1016/j.arth.2024.10.129","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is an uncommon, but serious complication in total joint arthroplasty. Personalized risk prediction and risk factor management may allow better preoperative assessment and improved outcomes. We evaluated different data-driven approaches to develop surgery-specific PJI prediction models using large-scale data from the electronic health records.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A large institutional arthroplasty registry was leveraged to collect data from 58,574 procedures of 41,844 patients who underwent at least one primary and/or revision hip and/or knee arthroplasty between 2000 and 2019. The registry dataset was augmented with additional clinical, procedural, and laboratory data from the electronic health records for more than 100 potential predictor variables. The main outcome was PJI within the first year after surgery. We implemented both traditional and machine learning methods for model development (lasso regression, relaxed lasso regression, ridge regression, random forest, stepwise regression, extreme gradient boosting, neural network) and used 10-fold cross-validation to calculate measures of model performance in terms of discrimination (c-statistic), cross-entropy loss, and calibration.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All models performed similarly in predicting PJI risk, with negligible differences of less than 0.08 between the best and worst-performing models. The relaxed and fully relaxed lasso models using the Cox model structure outperformed the other models with concordances of 0.787 in primary hip arthroplasty and 0.722 in revision hip arthroplasty, with the number of predictors ranging from nine to 41. The concordances with the relaxed lasso models were 0.681 in primary and 0.699 in revision knee arthroplasty, with a higher number of predictors in the models. Predictors included in the models varied substantially across the four surgical groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The incorporation of additional data from the electronic health records offers limited improvement in PJI risk stratification. Furthermore, improvement in PJI risk prediction was modest with the machine learning approaches and may not justify the added complexity.</p>","PeriodicalId":51077,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Arthroplasty","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Arthroplasty","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2024.10.129","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is an uncommon, but serious complication in total joint arthroplasty. Personalized risk prediction and risk factor management may allow better preoperative assessment and improved outcomes. We evaluated different data-driven approaches to develop surgery-specific PJI prediction models using large-scale data from the electronic health records.

Methods: A large institutional arthroplasty registry was leveraged to collect data from 58,574 procedures of 41,844 patients who underwent at least one primary and/or revision hip and/or knee arthroplasty between 2000 and 2019. The registry dataset was augmented with additional clinical, procedural, and laboratory data from the electronic health records for more than 100 potential predictor variables. The main outcome was PJI within the first year after surgery. We implemented both traditional and machine learning methods for model development (lasso regression, relaxed lasso regression, ridge regression, random forest, stepwise regression, extreme gradient boosting, neural network) and used 10-fold cross-validation to calculate measures of model performance in terms of discrimination (c-statistic), cross-entropy loss, and calibration.

Results: All models performed similarly in predicting PJI risk, with negligible differences of less than 0.08 between the best and worst-performing models. The relaxed and fully relaxed lasso models using the Cox model structure outperformed the other models with concordances of 0.787 in primary hip arthroplasty and 0.722 in revision hip arthroplasty, with the number of predictors ranging from nine to 41. The concordances with the relaxed lasso models were 0.681 in primary and 0.699 in revision knee arthroplasty, with a higher number of predictors in the models. Predictors included in the models varied substantially across the four surgical groups.

Conclusions: The incorporation of additional data from the electronic health records offers limited improvement in PJI risk stratification. Furthermore, improvement in PJI risk prediction was modest with the machine learning approaches and may not justify the added complexity.

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
利用电子健康记录开发全关节成形术中假体周围感染风险评分的数据驱动法。
背景:假体周围关节感染(PJI)是全关节成形术中一种不常见但严重的并发症。个性化的风险预测和风险因素管理可以更好地进行术前评估并改善预后。我们评估了不同的数据驱动方法,利用电子病历中的大规模数据建立了手术特异性 PJI 预测模型:方法:我们利用一个大型机构关节成形术登记处,收集了 2000 年至 2019 年期间接受过至少一次初次和/或翻修髋关节和/或膝关节成形术的 41844 名患者的 58574 例手术数据。登记数据集通过电子健康记录中的其他临床、手术和实验室数据进行了扩充,其中包含 100 多个潜在的预测变量。主要结果是术后第一年内的 PJI。我们采用了传统方法和机器学习方法(套索回归、松弛套索回归、脊回归、随机森林、逐步回归、极梯度提升、神经网络)进行模型开发,并使用10倍交叉验证来计算模型在区分度(c统计量)、交叉熵损失和校准方面的性能指标:所有模型在预测 PJI 风险方面的表现相似,表现最好和最差的模型之间的差异小于 0.08,可以忽略不计。使用 Cox 模型结构的松弛和完全松弛 lasso 模型在初次髋关节置换术中的一致性为 0.787,在翻修髋关节置换术中的一致性为 0.722,预测因子的数量从 9 个到 41 个不等,表现优于其他模型。松弛套索模型的一致性在初次髋关节置换术中为 0.681,在翻修膝关节置换术中为 0.699,模型中的预测因子数量较多。在四个手术组中,模型中包含的预测因子差异很大:结论:纳入电子健康记录中的额外数据对 PJI 风险分层的改善有限。此外,机器学习方法对 PJI 风险预测的改善不大,可能无法证明增加复杂性的合理性。
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
Journal of Arthroplasty
Journal of Arthroplasty 医学-整形外科
CiteScore
7.00
自引率
20.00%
发文量
734
审稿时长
48 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Arthroplasty brings together the clinical and scientific foundations for joint replacement. This peer-reviewed journal publishes original research and manuscripts of the highest quality from all areas relating to joint replacement or the treatment of its complications, including those dealing with clinical series and experience, prosthetic design, biomechanics, biomaterials, metallurgy, biologic response to arthroplasty materials in vivo and in vitro.
期刊最新文献
Systematic Review of Gender and Sex Terminology Use in Arthroplasty Research: There Is Room for Improvement. Recognizing the Sex Disparity in Surgeons Performing Total Knee Arthroplasty. Decreased Risk of Readmission and Complications With Preoperative GLP-1 Analog Use in Patients Undergoing Primary Total Joint Arthroplasty. Increased Involvement of Staphylococcus epidermidis in the Rise of Polymicrobial Periprosthetic Joint Infections. Total Knee Arthroplasty Periprosthetic Joint Infection With Concomitant Extensor Mechanism Disruption and Soft-Tissue Defect: The Knee Arthroplasty Terrible Triad.
×
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