Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39271585›Full record

ArticleObesity surgery2024

Advanced Non-linear Modeling and Explainable Artificial Intelligence Techniques for Predicting 30-Day Complications in Bariatric Surgery: A Single-Center Study.

Nicolas Zucchini, Eugenia Capozzella, Mauro Giuffrè, Manuela Mastronardi, Biagio Casagranda, Saveria Lory Crocè, Nicolò de Manzini, Silvia Palmisano

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Obesity surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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.

Nicolas ZucchiniDepartment of Medical, Surgical and Health Sciences, University of Trieste, Strada Di Fiume, 447, 34149, Trieste, Italy.
Eugenia CapozzellaDepartment of Medical, Surgical and Health Sciences, University of Trieste, Strada Di Fiume, 447, 34149, Trieste, Italy.
Mauro GiuffrèDepartment of Internal Medicine (Digestive Diseases), Yale School of Medicine, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA.
Manuela MastronardiDepartment of Medical, Surgical and Health Sciences, University of Trieste, Strada Di Fiume, 447, 34149, Trieste, Italy. manuela.mastronardi@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0003-3525-3692
Biagio CasagrandaSurgical Clinic Division, Cattinara Hospital, ASUGI, 34149, Trieste, Italy.
Saveria Lory CrocèDepartment of Medical, Surgical and Health Sciences, University of Trieste, Strada Di Fiume, 447, 34149, Trieste, Italy.
Nicolò de ManziniDepartment of Medical, Surgical and Health Sciences, University of Trieste, Strada Di Fiume, 447, 34149, Trieste, Italy.
Silvia PalmisanoDepartment of Medical, Surgical and Health Sciences, University of Trieste, Strada Di Fiume, 447, 34149, Trieste, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeMetabolic bariatric surgery (MBS) became integral to managing severe obesity. Understanding surgical risks associated with MBS is crucial. Different scores, such as the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP), aid in patient selection and outcome prediction. This study aims to evaluate machine learning (ML) models performance in predicting 30-day post-operative complications and compare them with the MBSAQIP risk score. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe retrospectively evaluated 424 consecutive patients (2006-2020) who underwent MBS, analyzing 30-day surgical complications according to Clavien-Dindo Classification. ML models, including logistic regression, support vector machine, random forest, k-nearest neighbors, multi-layer perceptron, and extreme gradient boosting, were analyzed and compared to MBSAQIP risk score. Performance was measured by area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) analysis.

resultsRandom forest showed the highest AUROC in the training (AUROC = 0.94) and the validation set (AUROC = 0.88). ML algorithms, particularly random forest, outperformed MBSAQIP in predicting negative 30-day outcomes in both the training and validation sets (AUROC = 0.64, DeLong's Test p < 0.001). The five features that were more relevant for the prediction of the random forest model were serum alkaline phosphatase, platelet count, triglycerides, glycated hemoglobin, and albumin.

conclusionWe developed several ML model that identifies patients at risk for 30-day complications after MBS. Among these, random forest is the most performing one and outperforms the already established MBSAQIP score. This model could increase the identification of high-risk patients before MBS.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceBariatric SurgeryObesity, MorbidPostoperative ComplicationsAdultFemaleHumansMachine LearningMaleMiddle AgedNonlinear DynamicsRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentROC CurveArtificial intelligence; Explainable artificial intelligenceMetabolic surgeryRisk scores

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.