Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32667760›Full record

ArticleClinical orthopaedics and related research2020

Can Machine-learning Algorithms Predict Early Revision TKA in the Danish Knee Arthroplasty Registry?

Anders El-Galaly, Clare Grazal, Andreas Kappel, Poul Torben Nielsen, Steen Lund Jensen, Jonathan A Forsberg

Open access · greenAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical orthopaedics and related research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
7.1field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 50 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Optimal inputs for machine learning models in predicting total joint arthroplasty outcomes: a systematic review.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Machine learning in knee arthroplasty: specific data are key-a systematic review.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2022
    Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Joint-specific measures improve risk adjustment in total knee arthroplasty: A machine learning approach.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2026
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Imaging of knee osteoarthritis: a review of multimodal diagnostic approach.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2023
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 4 countries.

Anders El-GalalyA. El-Galaly, A. Kappel, P. T. Nielsen, S. L. Jensen, Orthopedic Research Unit, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark.
Clare GrazalC. Grazal, J. A. Forsberg, Uniformed Services University-Walter Reed Department of Surgery, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Andreas KappelA. El-Galaly, A. Kappel, P. T. Nielsen, S. L. Jensen, Orthopedic Research Unit, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark.
Poul Torben NielsenA. El-Galaly, A. Kappel, P. T. Nielsen, S. L. Jensen, Orthopedic Research Unit, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark.
Steen Lund JensenA. El-Galaly, A. Kappel, P. T. Nielsen, S. L. Jensen, Orthopedic Research Unit, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark.
Jonathan A ForsbergJ. A. Forsberg, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore MD, USA.
Aalborg University Hospital · DKJohns Hopkins University · USUniformed Services University of the Health Sciences · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRevision TKA is a serious adverse event with substantial consequences for the patient. As the demand for TKA rises, reducing the risk of revision TKA is becoming increasingly important. Predictive tools based on machine-learning algorithms could reform clinical practice. Few attempts have been made to combine machine-learning algorithms with data from nationwide arthroplasty registries and, to the authors' knowledge, none have tried to predict the likelihood of early revision TKA. QUESTION/PURPOSES: We used the Danish Knee Arthroplasty Registry to build models to predict the likelihood of revision TKA within 2 years of primary TKA and asked: (1) Which preoperative factors were the most important features behind these models' predictions of revision? (2) Can a clinically meaningful model be built on the preoperative factors included in the Danish Knee Arthroplasty Registry?

methodsThe Danish Knee Arthroplasty Registry collects patients' characteristics and surgical information from all arthroplasties conducted in Denmark and thus provides a large nationwide cohort of patients undergoing TKA. As training dataset, we retrieved all preoperative variables of 25,104 primary TKAs from 2012 to 2015. The same variables were retrieved from 6170 TKAs conducted in 2016, which were used as a hold-out year for temporal external validation. If a patient received bilateral TKA, only the first knee to receive surgery was included. All patients were followed for 2 years, with removal, exchange, or addition of an implant defined as TKA revision. We created four different predictive models to find the best performing model, including a regression-based model using logistic regression with least shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO), two classification tree models (random forest and gradient boosting model) and a supervised neural network. For comparison, we created a noninformative model predicting that all observations were unrevised. The four machine learning models were trained using 10-fold cross-validation on the training dataset after adjusting for the low percentage of revisions by over-sampling revised observations and undersampling unrevised observations. In the validation dataset, the models' performance was evaluated and compared by density plot, calibration plot, accuracy, Brier score, receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve and area under the curve (AUC). The density plot depicts the distribution of probabilities and the calibration plot graphically depicts whether the predicted probability resembled the observed probability. The accuracy indicates how often the models' predictions were correct and the Brier score is the mean distance from the predicted probability to the observed outcome. The ROC curve is a graphical output of the models' sensitivity and specificity from which the AUC is calculated. The AUC can be interpreted as the likelihood that a model correctly classified an observation and thus, a priori, an AUC of 0.7 was chosen as threshold for a clinically meaningful model.

resultsBased the model training, age, postfracture osteoarthritis and weight were deemed as important preoperative factors within the machine learning models. During validation, the models' performance was not different from the noninformative models, and with AUCs ranging from 0.57 to 0.60, no models reached the predetermined AUC threshold for a clinical useful discriminative capacity.

conclusionAlthough several well-known presurgical risk factors for revision were coupled with four different machine learning methods, we could not develop a clinically useful model capable of predicting early TKA revisions in the Danish Knee Arthroplasty Registry based on preoperative data. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The inability to predict early TKA revision highlights that predicting revision based on preoperative information alone is difficult. Future models might benefit from including medical comorbidities and an anonymous surgeon identifier variable or may attempt to build a postoperative predictive model including intra- and postoperative factors as these may have a stronger association with early TKA revisions.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsMachine LearningAdultAgedAge FactorsArthroplasty, Replacement, KneeBody WeightDenmarkFemaleHumansKnee InjuriesMaleMiddle AgedOsteoarthritis, KneePostoperative ComplicationsPredictive Value of Tests

Identifiers

PMID32667760
PMCPMC7431253
OpenAlexW3043764109

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.