Employing machine learning to predict adverse acute post-surgical outcomes following elective ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/issn.2455-4510.IntJResOrthop20232605Keywords:
Machine learning, ACS-NSQIP, UCL reconstructionAbstract
Background: Ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction ameliorates valgus elbow instability in various patient populations, including overhead athletes, patients with acute UCL rupture following high energy trauma, and those with chronic, subclinical elbow laxity. This study aims to explore machine learning algorithms to identify risk factors in patients undergoing elective UCL reconstruction in the ambulatory setting to predict postoperative outcomes.
Methods: RStudio was used to create a filtering code to identify adult patients who underwent elective UCL reconstruction from 2008 to 2018 in the American college of surgeons national surgical quality improvement program database. Patients were analyzed using six ML algorithms, which were trained to predict outcomes such as extended length of stay, non-home discharge, and adverse events based on various patient characteristics and surgical variables. Algorithmic performance was then assessed and top performing algorithms underwent further analysis to determine relative feature importance using a permutation feature importance method.
Results: ML exhibited excellent performance in predicting LOS, with an average AUC of 0.953, similar to that of logistic regression. Regarding NHD, ML demonstrated a 60.8% increase in AUC compared to LR. In predicting AAE, ML achieved an average AUC that was 12.7% higher than LR.
Conclusions: The highly predictive capability of ML indicates the possibility to represent a procedure-specific complementary tool for the preoperative risk stratification process. This study provides a comprehensive analysis of UCL reconstruction in the management and outcomes of any patient, regardless of age or activity level.
References
Jensen AR, LaPrade MD, Turner TW, Dines JS, Camp CL. The History and Evolution of Elbow Medial Ulnar Collateral Ligament Reconstruction: from Tommy John to 2020. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med. 2020; 13(3):349-360.
Erickson BJ, Harris JD, Chalmers PN, Bach BR Jr, Verma NN, Bush-Joseph CA, et al. Anatomy, Indications, Techniques, and Outcomes. Sports Health. 2015;7(6):511-7.
Nicolette GW, Gravlee JR. Ulnar collateral ligament injuries of the elbow in female division I collegiate gymnasts: a report of five cases. Open Access J Sports Med. 2018;9:183-9.
Liman MNP, Avva U, Ashurst JV. Elbow Trauma. Treasure Island: Stat Pearls Publishing; 2020.
Armañanzas R, Alonso-Nanclares L, Defelipe-Oroquieta J, Kastanauskaite A, de Sola RG, Defelipe J, et al. Machine learning approach for the outcome prediction of temporal lobe epilepsy surgery. PLoS One. 2013;8(4):e62819.
Carr JB, Camp CL, Dines JS. Elbow Ulnar Collateral Ligament Injuries: Indications, Management, and Outcomes. Arthroscopy. 2020;36(5):1221-2.
Chen FS, Rokito AS, Jobe FW. Medial elbow problems in the overhead-throwing athlete. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2001;9(2):99-113.
Loftice J, Fleisig GS, Zheng N, Andrews JR. Biomechanics of the elbow in sports. Clin Sports Med. 2004;23(4):519-30
Munnich EL, Parente ST. Procedures take less time at ambulatory surgery centers, keeping costs down and ability to meet demand up. Health Aff (Millwood). 2014;33(5):764-9.
Fabricant PD, Seeley MA, Rozell JC, Fieldston E, Flynn JM, Wells LM, et al. Cost Savings From Utilization of an Ambulatory Surgery Center for Orthopaedic Day Surgery. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2016;24(12):865-871.
Carlstrom LP, Helal A, Perry A, Lakomkin N, Graffeo CS, Clarke MJ. Too frail is to fail: Frailty portends poor outcomes in the elderly with type II odontoid fractures independent of management strategy. J Clin Neurosci. 2021;93:48-53.
Gowd AK, Agarwalla A, Amin NH, Romeo AA, Nicholson GP, Verma NN, et al. Construct validation of machine learning in the prediction of short-term postoperative complications following total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2019;28(12): e410-e421.
Yu T, Zhu H. Hyper-parameter optimization: a review of algorithms and applications. ArXiv. 2020;10:485.
Van RG, Drake FL. Python 3 Reference Manual. Create Space. 2009.
Pedregosa F, Varoquaux G, Gramfort A. Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python. J Mach Learn Res. 2011;12:2825-30.
Provider enrollment and certification- overnight stays in ambulatory surgical centers. center for medicare and medicaid services. Available at: https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Provider-Enrollment-andCertification/SurveyCertificationGenInfo/ downloads/SCLetter04-22.pdf. Accessed on 20 February 2023.
Gramfort A. Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python. JMLR. 2011;12:2825-30.
Gholamy A, Kreinovich V, Kosheleva O. Why 70/30 or 80/20 Relation Between Training and Testing Sets: A Pedagogical Explanation. Mach Learn Res. 2020.
Yu T, Zhu H. Hyper-parameter optimization: a review of algorithms and applications. ArXiv. 2020;10:485.
Zhou J, Gandomi AH, Chen F, Holzinger A. Evaluating the Quality of Machine Learning Explanations: A Survey on Methods and Metrics. Electronics. 2021;10(5):593.
Shreffler J, Huecker MR. Diagnostic Testing Accuracy: Sensitivity, Specificity, Predictive Values and Likelihood Ratios. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2023.
Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S. Applied logistic regression, 2nd ed. USA: Wiley; 2000:156-64.
Hunter JD. Matplotlib: A 2D Graphics Environment. Comput Sci Engineer. 2020;9(3), 90-5.
Kaneko H. Cross-validated permutation feature importance considering correlation between features. Analyt Sci Adv. 2022;3(9-10):278-87.
Cava W, Bauer C. Interpretation of machine learning predictions for patient outcomes in electronic health records. AMIA. 2019;10:572-81.
Altmann A, Toloşi L, Sander O, Lengauer T. Permutation importance: a corrected feature importance measure. Bioinformatics. 2010;26(10): 1340-7.
Cain EL, Andrews JR, Dugas JR. Outcome of Ulnar Collateral Ligament Reconstruction of the Elbow in 1281 Athletes: Results in 743 Athletes with Minimum 2-Year Follow-up. Am J Sports Med. 2010;38(12): 2426-34.
Erickson BJ, Gupta AK, Harris JD, Bush-Joseph C, Bach BR, Abrams GD, et al. Rate of return to pitching and performance after Tommy John surgery in Major League Baseball pitchers. Am J Sports Med. 2014; 42(3):536-43.
Jack RA 2nd, Burn MB, Sochacki KR, McCulloch PC, Lintner DM, Harris JD. Performance and Return to Sport After Tommy John Surgery Among Major League Baseball Position Players. Am J Sports Med. 2018;46(7):1720-6.
Glogovac G, Grawe BM. Outcomes With a Focus on Return to Play for Revision Ulnar Collateral Ligament Surgery Among Elite-Level Baseball Players: A Systematic Review. Am J Sports Med. 2019;47(11): 2759-63.
Osbahr DC, Cain EL, Raines BT, Fortenbaugh D, Dugas JR, Andrews JR. Long-term Outcomes After Ulnar Collateral Ligament Reconstruction in Competitive Baseball Players: Minimum 10-Year Follow-up. Am J Sports Med. 2014;42(6):1333-42.
Chauhan A, McQueen P, Chalmers PN, Ciccotti MG, Camp CL, D'Angelo J, et al. Nonoperative Treatment of Elbow Ulnar Collateral Ligament Injuries With and Without Platelet-Rich Plasma in Professional Baseball Players: A Comparative and Matched Cohort Analysis. Am J Sports Med. 2019;47(13):3107-19.
Ebert AB, Andrews JR. Ulnar Collateral Ligament (UCL) Reconstruction Technique. In: Bain G, Eygendaal D, van Riet R, eds. Surgical Techniques for Trauma and Sports Related Injuries of the Elbow. Berlin: Springer; 2007;10:1-30.
Clain JB, Vitale MA, Ahmad CS, Ruchelsman DE. Ulnar Nerve Complications After Ulnar Collateral Ligament Reconstruction of the Elbow: A Systematic Review. Am J Sports Med. 2019;47(5):1263-9.
Saper M, Shung J, Pearce S, Bompadre V, Andrews JR. Outcomes and Return to Sport After Ulnar Collateral Ligament Reconstruction in Adolescent Baseball Players. Orthop J Sports Med. 2018;6(4):232-5.
