ArticleClinical orthopaedics and related research2020
Can Machine-learning Algorithms Predict Early Revision TKA in the Danish Knee Arthroplasty Registry?
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.
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
25 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 50 citations in OpenAlex.
- Optimal inputs for machine learning models in predicting total joint arthroplasty outcomes: a systematic review.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2024Pooled it
- Machine learning in knee arthroplasty: specific data are key-a systematic review.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2022Pooled it
- Artificial Intelligence in Arthroplasty: A Comprehensive Structured Critical Review and Descriptive Evidence Map of Validation, Uncertainty, and Workflow Integration.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence-Based Prediction of Prognosis After Nonsurgical Treatment for Medial Meniscus Posterior Root Tear.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2026Article
- Joint-specific measures improve risk adjustment in total knee arthroplasty: A machine learning approach.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2026Article
- The global profile of individuals undergoing total knee replacement surgery through a PROGRESS-PLUS equity lens: A systematic review.The South African journal of physiotherapy · 2026Review
- Current Concepts in Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Arthroplasty: A Review of the Perioperative Pathway.Cureus · 2025Review
- The downstream risk of multiple revisions following a prior TKA revision due to infection is higher compared to an aseptic TKA revision: A nationwide register study.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Article
- Leveraging transfer learning for predicting total knee arthroplasty failure from post-operative radiographs.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2024Article
- Evaluation of machine learning models to identify hip arthroplasty implants using transfer learning algorithms.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2023Article
- Comparable performance of machine learning algorithms in predicting readmission and complications following total joint arthroplasty with external validation.Arthroplasty (London, England) · 2023Article
- Imaging of knee osteoarthritis: a review of multimodal diagnostic approach.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2023Review
- Transforming Orthopedic Joint Surgeries: The Role of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Robotics.Cureus · 2023Article
- A role for artificial intelligence applications inside and outside of the operating theatre: a review of contemporary use associated with total knee arthroplasty.Arthroplasty (London, England) · 2023Review
- Challenges of Integrating New Technologies for Orthopedic Doctors to Face up to Difficulties during the Pandemic Era.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Prediction of complications and surgery duration in primary TKA with high accuracy using machine learning with arthroplasty-specific data.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2023Article
- Cutting-Edge Approaches in Arthroplasty: Before, during and after Surgery.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- The current role of the virtual elements of artificial intelligence in total knee arthroplasty.EFORT open reviews · 2022Review
- Artificial intelligence in knee arthroplasty: current concept of the available clinical applications.Arthroplasty (London, England) · 2022Review
- Artificial intelligence in diagnosis of knee osteoarthritis and prediction of arthroplasty outcomes: a review.Arthroplasty (London, England) · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.