Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35006281›Full record

SynthesisKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2022

Machine learning in knee arthroplasty: specific data are key-a systematic review.

Florian Hinterwimmer, Igor Lazic, Christian Suren, Michael T Hirschmann, Florian Pohlig, Daniel Rueckert, Rainer Burgkart, Rüdiger von Eisenhart-Rothe

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
12.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 60 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. 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
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. [Artificial intelligence in arthroplasty].Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Florian Hinterwimmer *Department of Orthopaedics and Sports Orthopaedics, Klinikum Rechts Der Isar, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, München, Germany. florian.hinterwimmer@tum.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0273-0643
Igor Lazic *Department of Orthopaedics and Sports Orthopaedics, Klinikum Rechts Der Isar, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, München, Germany. igor.lazic@mri.tum.de.
Christian SurenDepartment of Orthopaedics and Sports Orthopaedics, Klinikum Rechts Der Isar, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, München, Germany.
Michael T HirschmannDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology-Liestal, Kantonsspital Baselland, Bruderholz, Laufen, Switzerland.
Florian PohligDepartment of Orthopaedics and Sports Orthopaedics, Klinikum Rechts Der Isar, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, München, Germany.
Daniel RueckertInstitute for AI and Informatics in Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Rainer BurgkartDepartment of Orthopaedics and Sports Orthopaedics, Klinikum Rechts Der Isar, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, München, Germany.
Rüdiger von Eisenhart-RotheDepartment of Orthopaedics and Sports Orthopaedics, Klinikum Rechts Der Isar, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, München, Germany.
TUM Klinikum · DEKantonsspital Baselland · CHTechnical University of Munich · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeArtificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare is rapidly growing and offers novel options of data analysis. Machine learning (ML) represents a distinct application of AI, which is capable of generating predictions and has already been tested in different medical specialties with various approaches such as diagnostic applications, cost predictions or identification of risk factors. In orthopaedics, this technology has only recently been introduced and the literature on ML in knee arthroplasty is scarce. In this review, we aim to investigate which predictions are already feasible using ML models in knee arthroplasty to identify prerequisites for the effective use of this novel approach. For this reason, we conducted a systematic review of ML algorithms for outcome prediction in knee arthroplasty.

methodsA comprehensive search of PubMed, Medline database and the Cochrane Library was conducted to find ML applications for knee arthroplasty. All relevant articles were systematically retrieved and evaluated by an orthopaedic surgeon and a data scientist on the basis of the PRISMA statement. The search strategy yielded 225 articles of which 19 were finally assessed as eligible. A modified Coleman Methodology Score (mCMS) was applied to account for a methodological evaluation.

resultsThe studies presented in this review demonstrated fair to good results (AUC median 0.76/range 0.57-0.98), while heterogeneous prediction models were analysed: complications (6), costs (4), functional outcome (3), revision (2), postoperative satisfaction (2), surgical technique (1) and biomechanical properties (1) were investigated. The median mCMS was 65 (range 40-80) points.

conclusionThe prediction of distinct outcomes with ML models applying specific data is already feasible; however, the prediction of more complex outcomes is still inaccurate. Registry data on knee arthroplasty have not been fully analysed yet so that specific parameters have not been sufficiently evaluated. The inclusion of specific input data as well as the collaboration of orthopaedic surgeons and data scientists are essential prerequisites to fully utilize the capacity of ML in knee arthroplasty. Future studies should investigate prospective data with specific and longitudinally recorded parameters. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, KneeArtificial IntelligenceHumansMachine LearningProspective StudiesRisk FactorsArtificial intelligenceKnee arthroscopyKnee surgeryMachine learningSupervised learningTotal knee arthroplasty

Identifiers

PMID35006281
PMCPMC8866371
OpenAlexW4206180198

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.