ArticleInternational journal of surgery (London, England)2025
90-day mortality prediction in elective visceral surgery using machine learning: a retrospective multicenter development, validation, and comparison study.
Article in International journal of surgery (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMachine Learning (ML) is increasingly being adopted in biomedical research, however, its potential for outcome prediction in visceral surgery remains uncertain. This study compares the potential of ML methods for preoperative 90-day mortality (90DM) prediction of an aggregated multi-organ approach to conventional scoring systems and individual organ models.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study enrolled patients undergoing major elective visceral surgery between 2014 and 2022 across two tertiary centers. Multiple ML models for preoperative 90DM prediction were trained, externally validated and benchmarked against the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score and revised Charlson Comorbidity Index (rCCI). Areas under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) and precision recall curves (AUPRC) including standard deviations were calculated. Additionally, individual models for esophageal, gastric, intestinal, liver, and pancreatic surgery were developed and compared to an aggregated approach.
results7711 cases encompassing 78 features were included. Overall 90DM was 4% (n = 309). An XBoost classifier demonstrated the best performance and high robustness following external validation (AUROC: 0.86 [0.01]; AUPRC: 0.2 [0.04]). All models outperformed the ASA score (AUROC: 0.72; AUPRC: 0.08) and rCCI (AUROC: 0.81; AUPRC: 0.11). rCCI, patient age and C-reactive protein emerged as most decisive model weights. Models for gastric (AUROC: 0.88 [0.13]; AUPRC: 0.24 [0.26]) and intestinal surgery (AUROC: 0.87 [0.05]; AUPRC: 0.17 [0.09]) revealed the highest organ-specific performances, while pancreatic surgery yielded the lowest results (AUROC: 0.66 [0.08]; AUPRC: 0.22 [0.12]). A combined multi-organ approach (AUROC: 0.84 [0.04]; AUPRC: 0.21 [0.06]) demonstrated superiority over the weighted average across all organ-specific models (AUROC: 0.82 [0.07]; AUPRC: 0.2 [0.13]).
conclusionML offers robust preoperative risk stratification for 90DM in elective visceral surgery. Leveraging training across multi-organ cohorts may improve accuracy and robustness compared to organ-specific models. Prospective studies are needed to confirm the potential of ML in surgical outcome prediction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.