ArticleSurgical endoscopy2021
Development and validation of machine learning models to predict gastrointestinal leak and venous thromboembolism after weight loss surgery: an analysis of the MBSAQIP database.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
48 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 81 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Evolution of Bariatric and Metabolic Surgery in the Artificial Intelligence Era: A Comprehensive Systematic Review of Current Applications and Clinical Implications.Obesity surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Artificial intelligence for venous thromboembolism risk stratification in surgical patients: a systematic review.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2026Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Systematic evaluation of machine learning models for postoperative surgical site infection prediction.PloS one · 2024Pooled it
- Prediction of Complications and Prognostication in Perioperative Medicine: A Systematic Review and PROBAST Assessment of Machine Learning Tools.Anesthesiology · 2024Pooled it
- Artificial Intelligence in Bariatric Surgery: Current Status and Future Perspectives.Obesity surgery · 2022Pooled it
- Bridging the Artificial Intelligence Translation Gap in Perioperative Pulmonary and Respiratory Complications: A Practical Framework for Institution-Level Implementation.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Application of Machine Learning to Predict 1-Year Weight Loss Outcomes After Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy.Obesity surgery · 2026Article
- Prediction of venous thromboembolism after metabolic and bariatric surgery using machine learning approach: a MBSAQIP study.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Which Method Best Predicts Postoperative Complications: Deep Learning, Machine Learning, or Conventional Logistic Regression?Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence in obesity management: clinical evidence, translational gaps, and implementation priorities-a structured narrative review.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Review
- Development and validation of an explainable machine learning model for predicting postoperative venous thromboembolism in esophageal cancer.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2026Article
- Postoperative enteral nutrition timing and risk variation in elderly patients with perforated peptic ulcer.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
- Development and validation of machine learning models for assessing the risk of postoperative venous thromboembolism in cervical cancer patients.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The Role of Artificial Intelligence in the Prediction of Bariatric Surgery Complications: A Systematic Review.Cureus · 2025Review
- Predicting pregnancy at the first year following metabolic-bariatric surgery: development and validation of machine learning models.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- International expert consensus on the current status and future prospects of artificial intelligence in metabolic and bariatric surgery.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Harnessing Artificial Intelligence in Obesity Research and Management: A Comprehensive Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Predicting Preoperative Deep Vein Thrombosis in Elderly Hip Fracture Patients Using an Interpretable Machine Learning Model.International journal of general medicine · 2025Article
- Incidence and Risk Factors of Lower Limb Deep Vein Thrombosis in Psychiatric Inpatients by Applying Machine Learning to Electronic Health Records: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Clinical epidemiology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPostoperative gastrointestinal leak and venous thromboembolism (VTE) are devastating complications of bariatric surgery. The performance of currently available predictive models for these complications remains wanting, while machine learning has shown promise to improve on traditional modeling approaches. The purpose of this study was to compare the ability of two machine learning strategies, artificial neural networks (ANNs), and gradient boosting machines (XGBs) to conventional models using logistic regression (LR) in predicting leak and VTE after bariatric surgery.
methodsANN, XGB, and LR prediction models for leak and VTE among adults undergoing initial elective weight loss surgery were trained and validated using preoperative data from 2015 to 2017 from Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program database. Data were randomly split into training, validation, and testing populations. Model performance was measured by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) on the testing data for each model.
resultsThe study cohort contained 436,807 patients. The incidences of leak and VTE were 0.70% and 0.46%. ANN (AUC 0.75, 95% CI 0.73-0.78) was the best-performing model for predicting leak, followed by XGB (AUC 0.70, 95% CI 0.68-0.72) and then LR (AUC 0.63, 95% CI 0.61-0.65, p < 0.001 for all comparisons). In detecting VTE, ANN, and XGB, LR achieved similar AUCs of 0.65 (95% CI 0.63-0.68), 0.67 (95% CI 0.64-0.70), and 0.64 (95% CI 0.61-0.66), respectively; the performance difference between XGB and LR was statistically significant (p = 0.001).
conclusionsANN and XGB outperformed traditional LR in predicting leak. These results suggest that ML has the potential to improve risk stratification for bariatric surgery, especially as techniques to extract more granular data from medical records improve. Further studies investigating the merits of machine learning to improve patient selection and risk management in bariatric surgery are warranted.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.