Artificial intelligence for decision support in surgical oncology - a systematic review

M. Wagner, A. Schulze, Michael Haselbeck-Köbler, P. Probst, Johanna M. Brandenburg, E. Kalkum, A. Majlesara, A. Ramouz, R. Klotz, Felix Nickel, K. März, S. Bodenstedt, M. Dugas, L. Maier-Hein, A. Mehrabi, S. Speidel, M. Büchler, B. Müller-Stich
{"title":"Artificial intelligence for decision support in surgical oncology - a systematic review","authors":"M. Wagner, A. Schulze, Michael Haselbeck-Köbler, P. Probst, Johanna M. Brandenburg, E. Kalkum, A. Majlesara, A. Ramouz, R. Klotz, Felix Nickel, K. März, S. Bodenstedt, M. Dugas, L. Maier-Hein, A. Mehrabi, S. Speidel, M. Büchler, B. Müller-Stich","doi":"10.20517/ais.2022.21","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: We systematically review current clinical applications of artificial intelligence (AI) that use machine learning (ML) methods for decision support in surgical oncology with an emphasis on clinical translation. Methods: MEDLINE, Web of Science, and CENTRAL were searched on 19 January 2021 for a combination of AI and ML-related terms, decision support, and surgical procedures for abdominal malignancies. Data extraction included study characteristics, description of algorithms and their respective purpose, and description of key steps for scientific validation and clinical translation. Results: Out of 8302 articles, 107 studies were included for full-text analysis. Most of the studies were conducted in a retrospective setting (n = 105, 98%), with 45 studies (42%) using data from multiple centers. The most common tumor entities were colorectal cancer (n = 35, 33%), liver cancer (n = 21, 20%), and gastric cancer (n = 17, 16%). The most common prediction task was survival (n = 36, 34%), with artificial neural networks being the most common class of ML algorithms (n = 52, 49%). Key reporting and validation steps included, among others, a complete listing of patient features (n = 95, 89%), training of multiple algorithms (n = 73, 68%), external validation (n = 13, 12%), prospective validation (n = 2, 2%), robustness in terms of cross-validation or resampling (n = 89, 83%), treatment recommendations by ML algorithms (n = 9, 8%), and development of an interface (n = 12, 11%). Conclusion: ML for decision support in surgical oncology is receiving increasing attention with promising results, but robust and prospective clinical validation is mostly lacking. Furthermore, the integration of ML into AI applications is necessary to foster clinical translation.","PeriodicalId":72305,"journal":{"name":"Artificial intelligence surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Artificial intelligence surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20517/ais.2022.21","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Aim: We systematically review current clinical applications of artificial intelligence (AI) that use machine learning (ML) methods for decision support in surgical oncology with an emphasis on clinical translation. Methods: MEDLINE, Web of Science, and CENTRAL were searched on 19 January 2021 for a combination of AI and ML-related terms, decision support, and surgical procedures for abdominal malignancies. Data extraction included study characteristics, description of algorithms and their respective purpose, and description of key steps for scientific validation and clinical translation. Results: Out of 8302 articles, 107 studies were included for full-text analysis. Most of the studies were conducted in a retrospective setting (n = 105, 98%), with 45 studies (42%) using data from multiple centers. The most common tumor entities were colorectal cancer (n = 35, 33%), liver cancer (n = 21, 20%), and gastric cancer (n = 17, 16%). The most common prediction task was survival (n = 36, 34%), with artificial neural networks being the most common class of ML algorithms (n = 52, 49%). Key reporting and validation steps included, among others, a complete listing of patient features (n = 95, 89%), training of multiple algorithms (n = 73, 68%), external validation (n = 13, 12%), prospective validation (n = 2, 2%), robustness in terms of cross-validation or resampling (n = 89, 83%), treatment recommendations by ML algorithms (n = 9, 8%), and development of an interface (n = 12, 11%). Conclusion: ML for decision support in surgical oncology is receiving increasing attention with promising results, but robust and prospective clinical validation is mostly lacking. Furthermore, the integration of ML into AI applications is necessary to foster clinical translation.
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
人工智能在外科肿瘤学决策支持中的应用综述
目的:我们系统地回顾了目前人工智能(AI)的临床应用,这些应用使用机器学习(ML)方法在外科肿瘤学中进行决策支持,重点是临床翻译。方法:于2021年1月19日在MEDLINE、Web of Science和CENTRAL检索人工智能和机器学习相关的术语、决策支持和腹部恶性肿瘤的外科手术。数据提取包括研究特征、算法描述及其各自目的、科学验证和临床转化关键步骤的描述。结果:在8302篇文章中,107篇研究纳入全文分析。大多数研究是回顾性研究(n = 105,98 %),其中45项研究(42%)使用来自多个中心的数据。最常见的肿瘤实体是结直肠癌(n = 35, 33%)、肝癌(n = 21, 20%)和胃癌(n = 17, 16%)。最常见的预测任务是生存(n = 36,34%),人工神经网络是最常见的ML算法(n = 52,49%)。关键的报告和验证步骤包括,除其他外,患者特征的完整列表(n = 95,89%),多种算法的训练(n = 73,68%),外部验证(n = 13,12%),前瞻性验证(n = 2,2%),交叉验证或重新采样方面的稳健性(n = 89,83%), ML算法的治疗建议(n = 9,8%),以及界面的开发(n = 12,11%)。结论:机器学习在外科肿瘤学决策支持中的应用越来越受到关注,其结果令人鼓舞,但缺乏强有力的前瞻性临床验证。此外,将机器学习整合到人工智能应用程序中对于促进临床翻译是必要的。
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
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Robotic caudo-peripheral approach for liver parenchymal transection in anatomical liver resections for hepatocellular carcinoma Digital twins as a unifying framework for surgical data science: the enabling role of geometric scene understanding The health technology assessment in the artificial intelligence era: the AI surgical department The 1st Orsi Innotech Surgical AI Day congress report The 1st Orsi Innotech Surgical AI Day congress report
×
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