ArticleJournal of neurosurgery. Spine2022
Preoperative prediction of postoperative urinary retention in lumbar surgery: a comparison of regression to multilayer neural network.
Article in Journal of neurosurgery. Spine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Revolutionizing spinal interventions: a systematic review of artificial intelligence technology applications in contemporary surgery.BMC surgery · 2024Pooled it
- A Unified Framework for Statistical Inference and Power Analysis of Single and ComparativeStatistics in medicine · 2026Article
- Risk prediction in spine surgery: a scoping review of traditional models, artificial intelligence, and the challenge of clinical translation.Spine deformity · 2026Review
- Preoperative Hypoalbuminemia, Functional Dependence, and Intraoperative Infusion Volume Associated with Postoperative Urinary Retention After Elective Spinal Surgery.International journal of general medicine · 2026Article
- Leveraging machine learning to develop a postoperative predictive model for postoperative urinary retention following lumbar spine surgery.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Article
- Limitations in Evaluating Machine Learning Models for Imbalanced Binary Outcome Classification in Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review.Brain sciences · 2023Review
- Pre-operative prediction of post-operative urinary retention in lumbar surgery: a prospective validation of machine learning model.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2023Article
- Construction and validation of a predictive model for postoperative urinary retention after lumbar interbody fusion surgery.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2023Article
- Review
- Therapeutic Neuromodulation toward a Critical State May Serve as a General Treatment Strategy.Biomedicines · 2022Article
- An Artificial Neural Network Model for the Prediction of Perioperative Blood Transfusion in Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Semi-Elective Cervical Disc Replacements for Cervical Myelopathy: A Qualitative Study.Patient preference and adherence · 2021Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivePostoperative urinary retention (POUR) is a common complication after spine surgery and is associated with prolongation of hospital stay, increased hospital cost, increased rate of urinary tract infection, bladder overdistention, and autonomic dysregulation. POUR incidence following spine surgery ranges between 5.6% and 38%; no reliable prediction tool to identify those at higher risk is available, and that constitutes an important gap in the literature. The objective of this study was to develop and validate a preoperative risk model to predict the occurrence of POUR following routine elective spine surgery.
methodsThe authors conducted a retrospective chart review of consecutive adults who underwent lumbar spine surgery between June 1, 2017, and June 1, 2019. Patient characteristics, preexisting ICD-10 codes, preoperative pain and opioid use, preoperative alpha-1 blocker use, details of surgical planning, development of POUR, and management strategies were abstracted from electronic medical records. A binomial logistic model and a multilayer perceptron (MLP) were optimized using training and validation sets. The models' performance was then evaluated on model-naïve patients (not a part of either cohort). The models were then stacked to take advantage of each model's strengths and to avoid their weaknesses. Four additional models were developed from previously published models adjusted to include only relevant factors (i.e., factors known preoperatively and applied to the lumbar spine).
resultsOverall, 891 patients were included in the cohort, with a mean of 59.6 ± 15.5 years of age, 52.7% male, BMI 30.4 ± 6.4, American Society of Anesthesiologists class 2.8 ± 0.6, and a mean of 5.6 ± 5.7 comorbidities. The rate of POUR was found to be 25.9%. The two models were comparable, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.737 for the regression model and 0.735 for the neural network. By combining the two models, an AUC of 0.753 was achieved. With a regression model probability cutoff of 0.24 and a neural network cutoff of 0.23, maximal sensitivity and specificity were achieved, with specificity 68.2%, sensitivity 72.9%, negative predictive value 88.2%, and positive predictive value 43.4%. Both models individually outperformed previously published models (AUC 0.516-0.645) when applied to the current data set.
conclusionsThis predictive model can be a powerful preoperative tool in predicting patients who will be likely to develop POUR. By using a combination of regression and neural network modeling, good sensitivity, specificity, and NPV are achieved.
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.