Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38156994›Full record

ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2024

Artificial intelligence-based analysis of associations between learning curve and clinical outcomes in endoscopic and microsurgical lumbar decompression surgery.

Babak Saravi, Alisia Zink, Sara Ülkümen, Sebastien Couillard-Despres, Gernot Lang, Frank Hassel

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in 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, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Using artificial intelligence and a walking aid to improve lumbar stability parameter evaluation methods.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 · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
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

6 authors.

Babak SaraviDepartment of Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery, Medical Centre - Albert-Ludwigs-University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, Albert-Ludwigs-University of Freiburg, Hugstetterstrasse 55, 79106, Freiburg, Germany. babak.saravi@jupiter.uni-freiburg.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2298-3696
Alisia ZinkDepartment of Spine Surgery, Loretto Hospital, Freiburg, Germany.
Sara ÜlkümenDepartment of Spine Surgery, Loretto Hospital, Freiburg, Germany.
Sebastien Couillard-DespresInstitute of Experimental Neuroregeneration, Spinal Cord Injury and Tissue Regeneration Center Salzburg (SCI-TReCS), Paracelsus Medical University, 5020, Salzburg, Austria.
Gernot Lang *Department of Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery, Medical Centre - Albert-Ludwigs-University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, Albert-Ludwigs-University of Freiburg, Hugstetterstrasse 55, 79106, Freiburg, Germany.
Frank Hassel *Department of Spine Surgery, Loretto Hospital, Freiburg, Germany.

Funding

Joimax GmbH (Fellowship support)
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeA common spine surgery procedure involves decompression of the lumbar spine. The impact of the surgeon's learning curve on relevant clinical outcomes is currently not well examined in the literature. A variety of machine learning algorithms have been investigated in this study to determine how a surgeon's learning curve and other clinical parameters will influence prolonged lengths of stay (LOS), extended operating times (OT), and complications, as well as whether these clinical parameters can be reliably predicted.

methodsA retrospective monocentric cohort study of patients with lumbar spinal stenosis treated with microsurgical (MSD) and full-endoscopic (FED) decompression was conducted. The study included 206 patients with lumbar spinal stenosis who underwent FED (63; 30.6%) and MSD (118; 57.3%). Prolonged LOS and OT were defined as those exceeding the 75th percentile of the cohort. Furthermore, complications were assessed as a dependent variable. Using unsupervised learning, clusters were identified in the data, which helped distinguish between the early learning curve (ELC) and the late learning curve (LLC). From 15 algorithms, the top five algorithms that best fit the data were selected for each prediction task. We calculated the accuracy of prediction (Acc) and the area under the curve (AUC). The most significant predictors were determined using a feature importance analysis.

resultsFor the FED group, the median number of surgeries with case surgery type at the time of surgery was 72 in the ELC group and 274 in the LLC group. FED patients did not significantly differ in outcome variables (LOS, OT, complication rate) between the ELC and LLC group. The random forest model demonstrated the highest mean accuracy and AUC across all folds for each classification task. For OT, it achieved an accuracy of 76.08% and an AUC of 0.89. For LOS, the model reached an accuracy of 83.83% and an AUC of 0.91. Lastly, in predicting complications, the random forest model attained the highest accuracy of 89.90% and an AUC of 0.94. Feature importance analysis indicated that LOS, OT, and complications were more significantly affected by patient characteristics than the surgical technique (FED versus MSD) or the surgeon's learning curve.

conclusionsA median of 72 cases of FED surgeries led to comparable clinical outcomes in the early learning curve phase compared to experienced surgeons. These outcomes seem to be more significantly affected by patient characteristics than the learning curve or the surgical technique. Several study variables, including the learning curve, can be used to predict whether lumbar decompression surgery will result in an increased LOS, OT, or complications. To introduce the provided prediction tools into clinics, the algorithms need to be implemented into open-source software and externally validated through large-scale randomized controlled trials.

Indexed as

Decompression, SurgicalLearning CurveLumbar VertebraeMicrosurgerySpinal StenosisAgedArtificial IntelligenceEndoscopyFemaleHumansLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeArtificial intelligenceComplicationsLength of stayOperation timePredictionSpine surgery

Identifiers

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.