SynthesisBMC surgery2025
Predictions of postoperative and perioperative complications of laparoscopic cholecystectomy using machine learning algorithms: systematic review.
Synthesis in BMC surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLaparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is a widely performed procedure with potential postoperative and perioperative complications. Recent advances in machine learning (ML) can lead to early prediction of these complications, but no systematic review has synthesized this data. This review aims to assess ML algorithms’ accuracy in predicting these complications following LC.
methodsA systematic review was conducted by PRISMA guidelines. A comprehensive search was performed on PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science databases for studies published between 2010 and 2024. Studies that applied ML algorithms to predict complications during and after LC were included. Quality assessment was performed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Due to study heterogeneity, a meta-analysis was not conducted; instead, a narrative synthesis was performed.
resultsA total of 6 studies were included in the review. Various machine learning algorithms, such as decision trees, deep learning, artificial neural networks (ANN), and adaptive boosting, were assessed for predicting postoperative and perioperative complications after laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). ANN models showed superior performance, with mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) values ranging from 4.20 to 8.60% in predicting quality of life post-LC. Deep learning models achieved a balanced accuracy of 71.4% for critical view of safety (CVS) assessment during LC. Adaboost algorithms effectively identified key risk factors for hepatic fibrosis in post-cholecystectomy patients. However, models predicting surgical adverse events faced limitations due to low prevalence, resulting in lower predictive values.
conclusionML models show great potential in predicting postoperative complications following LC while also considering intraoperative and perioperative outcomes that impact patient safety and postoperative recovery, but limitations such as small sample sizes and limited applicability remain. Further research is needed to validate these models in larger, more diverse populations.
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.