Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37117260›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2023

Prediction of total knee replacement using deep learning analysis of knee MRI.

Haresh Rengaraj Rajamohan, Tianyu Wang, Kevin Leung, Gregory Chang, Kyunghyun Cho, Richard Kijowski, Cem M Deniz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. ShapeMed-Knee: A Dataset and Neural Shape Model Benchmark for Modeling 3D Femurs.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2024
    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

7 authors.

Haresh Rengaraj RajamohanCenter for Data Science, New York University, 60 5th Ave, New York, NY, 10011, USA.
Tianyu WangCenter for Data Science, New York University, 60 5th Ave, New York, NY, 10011, USA.
Kevin LeungCourant Institute of Mathematical Sciences, New York University, 251 Mercer St, New York, NY, 10012, USA.
Gregory ChangDepartment of Radiology, New York University Langone Health, 660 1st Ave, New York, NY, 10016, USA.
Kyunghyun ChoCenter for Data Science, New York University, 60 5th Ave, New York, NY, 10011, USA.
Richard KijowskiDepartment of Radiology, New York University Langone Health, 660 1st Ave, New York, NY, 10016, USA.
Cem M DenizDepartment of Radiology, New York University Langone Health, 660 1st Ave, New York, NY, 10016, USA. cem.deniz@nyulangone.org.

Funding

TR&D 4: Revealing Microstructure: Biophysical modeling and validation for discovery and clinical careP41EB017183 · NIBIB · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI Dmitry S Novikov · 2014 to 2026
$19.3M
DATA COORDINATING CENTER FOR THE OSTEOARTHRITIS INITIATIVEN01AR22258 · NIAMS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI NEVITT, MICHAEL · 2007 to 2011
$13.5M
CLINICAL CENTERS FOR THE OSTEOARTHRITIS INITIATIVEN01AR22259 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE · PI HOCHBERG, MARC C. · 2007 to 2011
$7.8M
Clinical Centers for the Osteoarthritis Initiative^Rhode IslandN01AR22262 · NIAMS · MEMORIAL HOSPITAL OF RHODE ISLAND · PI EATON, CHARLES B. · 2007 to 2010
$6.8M
CLINICAL CENTERS FOR THE OSTEOARTHRITIS INITIATIVEN01AR22261 · NIAMS · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY RESEARCH FDN · PI JACKSON, REBECCA · 2007 to 2011
$6.2M
CLINICAL CENTERS FOR THE OSTEOARTHRITIS INITIATIVEN01AR22260 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · 2007 to 2010
$6.1M
Deep Learning-based Imaging Biomarkers for Knee OsteoarthritisR01AR074453 · NIAMS · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI DENIZ, CEM MURAT · 2019 to 2023
$2.5M
NEW PHARMACOLOGY ASPECTS RELATED TO CARBONIC ANHYDRASER01HL022258 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA · PI MAREN, THOMAS H · 1985 to 1986
–
CLINICAL CENTERS FOR THE OSTEOARTHRITIS INITIATIVE-N01AR22260N01AR022260 · NIAMS · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH · PI KWOH, KENT · 2002 to 2006
–
CLINICAL CENTERS FOR THE OSTEOARTHRITIS INITIATIVE-N01AR22261N01AR022261 · NIAMS · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY RESEARCH · PI JACKSON, REBECCA · 2002 to 2006
–
CLINICAL CENTER FOR THE OSTEOARTHRITIS-264022262-264022262N01AR022262 · NIAMS · THE MEMORIAL HOSPITAL · PI ASSAF, ANNLOUISE R. · 2002 to 2006
–
CLINICAL CENTERS FOR THE OSTEOARTHRITIS INITIATIVE-264022259-264022259N01AR022259 · NIAMS · UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND AT BALT · PI HOCHBERG, MARC C. · 2002 to 2006
–
NHLBI NIH HHS N01AR22258NIAMS NIH HHS N01AR22259NIAMS NIH HHS N01AR22260NIAMS NIH HHS N01AR22261NIAMS NIH HHS N01AR22262NIAMS NIH HHS R01 AR074453NIBIB NIH HHS P41 EB017183
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Current methods for assessing knee osteoarthritis (OA) do not provide comprehensive information to make robust and accurate outcome predictions. Deep learning (DL) risk assessment models were developed to predict the progression of knee OA to total knee replacement (TKR) over a 108-month follow-up period using baseline knee MRI. Participants of our retrospective study consisted of 353 case-control pairs of subjects from the Osteoarthritis Initiative with and without TKR over a 108-month follow-up period matched according to age, sex, ethnicity, and body mass index. A traditional risk assessment model was created to predict TKR using baseline clinical risk factors. DL models were created to predict TKR using baseline knee radiographs and MRI. All DL models had significantly higher (p < 0.001) AUCs than the traditional model. The MRI and radiograph ensemble model and MRI ensemble model (where TKR risk predicted by several contrast-specific DL models were averaged to get the ensemble TKR risk prediction) had the highest AUCs of 0.90 (80% sensitivity and 85% specificity) and 0.89 (79% sensitivity and 86% specificity), respectively, which were significantly higher (p < 0.05) than the AUCs of the radiograph and multiple MRI models (where the DL models were trained to predict TKR risk using single contrast or 2 contrasts together as input). DL models using baseline MRI had a higher diagnostic performance for predicting TKR than a traditional model using baseline clinical risk factors and a DL model using baseline knee radiographs.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, KneeDeep LearningOsteoarthritis, KneeHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID37117260
PMCPMC10147603

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.