Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40144303›Full record

ArticleOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2025

Predicting ACL Reconstruction Failure with Machine Learning: Development of Machine Learning Prediction Models.

Rafael Krasic Alaiti, Caio Sain Vallio, Andre Giardino Moreira da Silva, Riccardo Gomes Gobbi, José Ricardo Pécora, Camilo Partezani Helito

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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.

Rafael Krasic AlaitiResearch, Technology, and Data Science Office, Grupo Superador, São Paulo, Brazil.
Caio Sain VallioHealth Innovation, Data Science, and MLOps, Semantix, São Paulo, Brazil.
Andre Giardino Moreira da SilvaGrupo de Joelho, Instituto de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Hospital das Clínicas HCFMUSP, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Riccardo Gomes GobbiGrupo de Joelho, Instituto de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Hospital das Clínicas HCFMUSP, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
José Ricardo PécoraGrupo de Joelho, Instituto de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Hospital das Clínicas HCFMUSP, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Camilo Partezani HelitoGrupo de Joelho, Instituto de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Hospital das Clínicas HCFMUSP, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is the predominant and widely accepted treatment modality for ACL injury. However, recurrence of ACL rupture or failure of the reconstruction remains a significant challenge. Despite several studies in the literature that have developed prediction models to address this issue by identifying prognostic factors for treatment outcomes using classical statistical methods, the predictive efficacy of these models is frequently suboptimal. Purpose: To (1) evaluate the predictive performance of different machine learning algorithms for the occurrence of failure in ACLR and (2) identify the most relevant predictors associated with this outcome. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A total of 680 patients who underwent ACLR between January 2012 and July 2021 were evaluated. The study outcome was ACLR failure-defined as a complete tear confirmed by magnetic resonance imaging, arthroscopy, or clinical ACL insufficiency-evaluated at a minimum 2-year follow-up. Routinely collected data were used to train 9 machine learning algorithms-including k-nearest neighbors classifier, decision tree classifier, random forest classifier, extra trees classifier, gradient boosting classifier, eXtreme Gradient Boosting, CatBoost classifier, and logistic regression. A random sample of 70% of patients was used to train the algorithms, and 30% were left for performance assessment, simulating new data. The performance of the models was evaluated with the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Results: The predictive performance of most models was good, with AUCs ranging from 0.71 to 0.85. The models with the best AUC metric were the CatBoost classifier (0.85 [95% CI, 0.81-0.89]) and the random forest classifier (0.84 [95% CI, 0.77-0.90). Knee hyperextension consistently emerged as the primary predictor for ACLR failure across all models subjected to our analysis. Conclusion: Machine learning algorithms demonstrated good performance in predicting ACLR failure. Moreover, knee hyperextension consistently emerged as the primary predictor for failure across all models subjected to our analysis. Clinical Relevance: The findings of this study highlight the potential of machine learning as a valuable clinical tool for decision-making on surgical intervention. By offering nuanced insights, these algorithms may contribute to the evolving landscape of orthopaedic practice. Also, this study confirms knee hyperextension as an important risk factor for ACLR failure.

Indexed as

anterior cruciate ligament injuryanterior cruciate ligament reconstructionartificial intelligencemachine learning

Identifiers

PMID40144303
PMCPMC11938500

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.