Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40069724›Full record

ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2025

Predicting periprosthetic joint infection in primary total knee arthroplasty: a machine learning model integrating preoperative and perioperative risk factors.

Yuk Yee Chong, Chun Man Lawrence Lau, Tianshu Jiang, Chunyi Wen, Jiang Zhang, Amy Cheung, Michelle Hilda Luk, Ka Chun Thomas Leung, Man Hong Cheung, Henry Fu and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

12 authors.

Yuk Yee ChongDepartment of Orthopedics and Traumatology, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Chun Man Lawrence LauDepartment of Orthopedics and Traumatology, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China. laucml@hku.hk.
Tianshu JiangDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Chunyi WenDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Jiang ZhangDepartment of Health Technology and Informatics, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Amy CheungDepartment of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Queen Mary Hospital, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Michelle Hilda LukDepartment of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Queen Mary Hospital, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Ka Chun Thomas LeungDepartment of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Queen Mary Hospital, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Man Hong CheungDepartment of Orthopedics and Traumatology, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Henry FuDepartment of Orthopedics and Traumatology, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Kwong Yuen ChiuDepartment of Orthopedics and Traumatology, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Ping Keung ChanDepartment of Orthopedics and Traumatology, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China. cpk464@yahoo.com.hk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPeriprosthetic joint infection leads to significant morbidity and mortality after total knee arthroplasty. Preoperative and perioperative risk prediction and assessment tools are lacking in Asia. This study developed the first machine learning model for individualized prediction of periprosthetic joint infection following primary total knee arthroplasty in this demographic.

methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on 3,483 primary total knee arthroplasty (81 with periprosthetic joint infection) from 1998 to 2021 in a Chinese tertiary and quaternary referral academic center. We gathered 60 features, encompassing patient demographics, operation-related variables, laboratory findings, and comorbidities. Six of them were selected after univariate and multivariate analysis. Five machine learning models were trained with stratified 10-fold cross-validation and assessed by discrimination and calibration analysis to determine the optimal predictive model.

resultsThe balanced random forest model demonstrated the best predictive capability with average metrics of 0.963 for the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.920 for balanced accuracy, 0.938 for sensitivity, and 0.902 for specificity. The significant risk factors identified were long operative time (OR, 9.07; p = 0.018), male gender (OR, 3.11; p < 0.001), ASA > 2 (OR, 1.68; p = 0.028), history of anemia (OR, 2.17; p = 0.023), and history of septic arthritis (OR, 4.35; p = 0.030). Spinal anesthesia emerged as a protective factor (OR, 0.55; p = 0.022).

conclusionOur study presented the first machine learning model in Asia to predict periprosthetic joint infection following primary total knee arthroplasty. We enhanced the model's usability by providing global and local interpretations. This tool provides preoperative and perioperative risk assessment for periprosthetic joint infection and opens the potential for better individualized optimization before total knee arthroplasty.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, KneeKnee ProsthesisMachine LearningProsthesis-Related InfectionsAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPreoperative PeriodRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsArtificial intelligenceJoint replacementMachine learningPerioperative factorPeriprosthetic joint infectionPrediction modelPreoperative factorPrimary total knee arthroplasty

Identifiers

PMID40069724
PMCPMC11895328

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.