了解人工智能在全关节置换术中植入物分析的应用:一项系统综述。

IF 2.3 4区 医学 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS Arthroplasty Pub Date : 2023-11-03 DOI:10.1186/s42836-023-00209-z
Aakash K Shah, Monish S Lavu, Christian J Hecht, Robert J Burkhart, Atul F Kamath
{"title":"了解人工智能在全关节置换术中植入物分析的应用:一项系统综述。","authors":"Aakash K Shah, Monish S Lavu, Christian J Hecht, Robert J Burkhart, Atul F Kamath","doi":"10.1186/s42836-023-00209-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>In recent years, there has been a significant increase in the development of artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms aimed at reviewing radiographs after total joint arthroplasty (TJA). This disruptive technology is particularly promising in the context of preoperative planning for revision TJA. Yet, the efficacy of AI algorithms regarding TJA implant analysis has not been examined comprehensively.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed, EBSCO, and Google Scholar electronic databases were utilized to identify all studies evaluating AI algorithms related to TJA implant analysis between 1 January 2000, and 27 February 2023 (PROSPERO study protocol registration: CRD42023403497). The mean methodological index for non-randomized studies score was 20.4 ± 0.6. We reported the accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and area under the curve (AUC) for the performance of each outcome measure.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our initial search yielded 374 articles, and a total of 20 studies with three main use cases were included. Sixteen studies analyzed implant identification, two addressed implant failure, and two addressed implant measurements. Each use case had a median AUC and accuracy above 0.90 and 90%, respectively, indicative of a well-performing AI algorithm. Most studies failed to include explainability methods and conduct external validity testing.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These findings highlight the promising role of AI in recognizing implants in TJA. Preliminary studies have shown strong performance in implant identification, implant failure, and accurately measuring implant dimensions. Future research should follow a standardized guideline to develop and train models and place a strong emphasis on transparency and clarity in reporting results.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level III.</p>","PeriodicalId":52831,"journal":{"name":"Arthroplasty","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10623774/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Understanding the use of artificial intelligence for implant analysis in total joint arthroplasty: a systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"Aakash K Shah, Monish S Lavu, Christian J Hecht, Robert J Burkhart, Atul F Kamath\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s42836-023-00209-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>In recent years, there has been a significant increase in the development of artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms aimed at reviewing radiographs after total joint arthroplasty (TJA). This disruptive technology is particularly promising in the context of preoperative planning for revision TJA. Yet, the efficacy of AI algorithms regarding TJA implant analysis has not been examined comprehensively.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed, EBSCO, and Google Scholar electronic databases were utilized to identify all studies evaluating AI algorithms related to TJA implant analysis between 1 January 2000, and 27 February 2023 (PROSPERO study protocol registration: CRD42023403497). The mean methodological index for non-randomized studies score was 20.4 ± 0.6. We reported the accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and area under the curve (AUC) for the performance of each outcome measure.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our initial search yielded 374 articles, and a total of 20 studies with three main use cases were included. Sixteen studies analyzed implant identification, two addressed implant failure, and two addressed implant measurements. Each use case had a median AUC and accuracy above 0.90 and 90%, respectively, indicative of a well-performing AI algorithm. Most studies failed to include explainability methods and conduct external validity testing.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These findings highlight the promising role of AI in recognizing implants in TJA. Preliminary studies have shown strong performance in implant identification, implant failure, and accurately measuring implant dimensions. Future research should follow a standardized guideline to develop and train models and place a strong emphasis on transparency and clarity in reporting results.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level III.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":52831,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Arthroplasty\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10623774/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Arthroplasty\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s42836-023-00209-z\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arthroplasty","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s42836-023-00209-z","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

引言:近年来,旨在审查全关节置换术(TJA)后射线照片的人工智能(AI)算法的发展显著增加。这种颠覆性技术在TJA翻修术前计划方面尤其有前景。然而,人工智能算法在TJA植入物分析方面的功效尚未得到全面检验。方法:利用PubMed、EBSCO和Google Scholar电子数据库确定2000年1月1日至2023年2月27日期间评估与TJA植入物分析相关的人工智能算法的所有研究(PROSPERO研究方案注册号:CRD42023403497)。非随机研究得分的平均方法指数为20.4 ± 0.6.我们报告了每项结果测量的准确性、敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值和曲线下面积(AUC)。结果:我们最初的搜索产生了374篇文章,总共包括了20项研究,其中有三个主要用例。16项研究分析了植入物识别,两项研究涉及植入物故障,两项涉及植入物测量。每个用例的中位AUC和准确度分别高于0.90和90%,表明AI算法性能良好。大多数研究都没有包括可解释性方法和进行外部有效性测试。结论:这些发现突出了人工智能在识别TJA植入物方面的前景。初步研究表明,在植入物识别、植入物失效和准确测量植入物尺寸方面具有强大的性能。未来的研究应遵循标准化的指导方针来开发和培训模型,并强调报告结果的透明度和清晰度。证据级别:三级。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
Understanding the use of artificial intelligence for implant analysis in total joint arthroplasty: a systematic review.

Introduction: In recent years, there has been a significant increase in the development of artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms aimed at reviewing radiographs after total joint arthroplasty (TJA). This disruptive technology is particularly promising in the context of preoperative planning for revision TJA. Yet, the efficacy of AI algorithms regarding TJA implant analysis has not been examined comprehensively.

Methods: PubMed, EBSCO, and Google Scholar electronic databases were utilized to identify all studies evaluating AI algorithms related to TJA implant analysis between 1 January 2000, and 27 February 2023 (PROSPERO study protocol registration: CRD42023403497). The mean methodological index for non-randomized studies score was 20.4 ± 0.6. We reported the accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and area under the curve (AUC) for the performance of each outcome measure.

Results: Our initial search yielded 374 articles, and a total of 20 studies with three main use cases were included. Sixteen studies analyzed implant identification, two addressed implant failure, and two addressed implant measurements. Each use case had a median AUC and accuracy above 0.90 and 90%, respectively, indicative of a well-performing AI algorithm. Most studies failed to include explainability methods and conduct external validity testing.

Conclusion: These findings highlight the promising role of AI in recognizing implants in TJA. Preliminary studies have shown strong performance in implant identification, implant failure, and accurately measuring implant dimensions. Future research should follow a standardized guideline to develop and train models and place a strong emphasis on transparency and clarity in reporting results.

Level of evidence: Level III.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Arthroplasty
Arthroplasty ORTHOPEDICS-
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
49
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊最新文献
A 10-point preoperative checklist: selecting patients for outpatient joint replacement surgery. Comparison of the safety and efficacy of three superficial skin closure methods for multi-layer wound closure in total knee arthroplasty: a multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled trial. Conversion of UKA to TKA using identical standard implants-How does it compare to primary UKA, primary TKA and revision TKA? Reliability of pre-resection ligament tension assessment in imageless robotic assisted total knee replacement. Should we be concerned when the anterior approach to the hip goes accidentally medial? A retrospective study.
×
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