Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40921854›Full record

ArticleGastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association2025

Time-sequential prediction of postoperative complications after gastric cancer surgery using machine learning: a multicenter cohort study.

Motonari Ri, Souya Nunobe, Tomonori Narita, Yasuyuki Seto, Yoshimasa Kawazoe, Kazuhiko Ohe, Lena Azuma, Nobuyoshi Takeshita

Abstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Time-sequential prediction of postoperative complications after gastric cancer surgery using machine learning.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Motonari RiDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Cancer Institute Hospital, Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, 3-8-31 Ariake, Koto-Ku, Tokyo, 135-8550, Japan.
Souya NunobeDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Cancer Institute Hospital, Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, 3-8-31 Ariake, Koto-Ku, Tokyo, 135-8550, Japan. souya.nunobe@jfcr.or.jp.ORCID 0000-0003-3012-5632
Tomonori NaritaDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Bunkyo City, Tokyo, Japan.
Yasuyuki SetoDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Bunkyo City, Tokyo, Japan.
Yoshimasa KawazoeDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Bunkyo City, Tokyo, Japan.
Kazuhiko OheDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Bunkyo City, Tokyo, Japan.
Lena AzumaDepartment for the Promotion of Medical Device Innovation, National Cancer Center Hospital East, Bunkyo City, Tokyo, Japan.
Nobuyoshi TakeshitaDepartment for the Promotion of Medical Device Innovation, National Cancer Center Hospital East, Bunkyo City, Tokyo, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough many studies have developed logistic regression models for predicting complications using preoperative and intraoperative data, none have applied comprehensive perioperative information with machine learning (ML) to enable time-sequential predictions.

methodsThis study included patients undergoing gastric cancer surgery between 2013 and 2019 at two hospitals. Comprehensive perioperative data were collected. Four ML models were developed: the postoperative day (POD) 1 and POD 3 models predicted complications occurring from POD 2 and POD 4, while the 24-h and 8-h models predicted complications within the 24 and 8 h, respectively, after collection of the most recent biochemical data and vital signs. Model performance was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) with repeated validation for generalizability.

resultsAmong 4139 patients, 782 (18.9%) experienced complications (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ II). The 8-h model achieved the highest AUC (0.737) for overall complications. The POD 3 model outperformed the POD 1 model, with AUCs exceeding 0.8 for pancreatic fistula (0.869) and intra-abdominal abscess (0.821). The 8-h and the 24-h model both achieved AUCs above 0.8 for specific infectious complications. The 8-h model demonstrated the following AUCs: 0.889 for pancreatic fistula, 0.842 for intra-abdominal abscess, 0.826 for pneumonia, and 0.824 for anastomotic leakage, surpassing all POD-based models. In each 8-h model, C-reactive protein, pulse rate, and intraoperative blood loss consistently emerged as significant variables.

conclusionHour-based ML models incorporating comprehensive perioperative data predict post-gastric cancer surgery complications with high accuracy and time-sequential capability, potentially aiding clinical decision-making and improving outcomes.

Indexed as

GastrectomyMachine LearningPostoperative ComplicationsStomach NeoplasmsAgedAged, 80 and overCohort StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrognosisRetrospective StudiesROC CurveTime FactorsGastrectomyGastric cancerMachine learningPostoperative complications

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.