Risk prediction models for complications after flap repair surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 1.8 3区 医学 Q2 SURGERY
Jiebin Yang, Xinya Qin, Lili Hou, Yamei Liu
{"title":"Risk prediction models for complications after flap repair surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Jiebin Yang, Xinya Qin, Lili Hou, Yamei Liu","doi":"10.1186/s12893-025-03072-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To systematically evaluate the performance and applicability of risk prediction models for complications after flap repair and to provide guidance for building and refining models.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, CNKI, SinoMed, VIP and Wanfang were searched for studies on risk prediction models for flap complications. The search period is from inception to December 28, 2024. The PROBAST tool was used to evaluate the quality of the prediction model research, and Stata 18 software was employed to meta-analyze the predictors of the models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 16 studies were included, 28 risk prediction models were constructed, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) ranged from 0.655 to 0.964, with 16 prediction models performing well (AUC > 0.7). Eleven articles underwent model calibration, 16 were validated internally, and 3 were validated externally. The results of the PROBAST review revealed that all 16 studies were at high risk of bias. The incidence rate of flap complications was 14.8% (95% CI, 10.7 - 19.0%). Body mass index (BMI), smoking history, long flap reconstruction time, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and postoperative infection were independent risk factors for complications after flap repair (P < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The risk prediction model for complications after flap repair has certain predictive value, but the overall risk of bias is high, and there is a lack of external validation; thus, it needs to be further enhanced and optimized to increase its prediction accuracy and clinical practicability.</p>","PeriodicalId":49229,"journal":{"name":"BMC Surgery","volume":"25 1","pages":"398"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12382001/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-025-03072-8","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To systematically evaluate the performance and applicability of risk prediction models for complications after flap repair and to provide guidance for building and refining models.

Methods: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, CNKI, SinoMed, VIP and Wanfang were searched for studies on risk prediction models for flap complications. The search period is from inception to December 28, 2024. The PROBAST tool was used to evaluate the quality of the prediction model research, and Stata 18 software was employed to meta-analyze the predictors of the models.

Results: A total of 16 studies were included, 28 risk prediction models were constructed, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) ranged from 0.655 to 0.964, with 16 prediction models performing well (AUC > 0.7). Eleven articles underwent model calibration, 16 were validated internally, and 3 were validated externally. The results of the PROBAST review revealed that all 16 studies were at high risk of bias. The incidence rate of flap complications was 14.8% (95% CI, 10.7 - 19.0%). Body mass index (BMI), smoking history, long flap reconstruction time, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and postoperative infection were independent risk factors for complications after flap repair (P < 0.05).

Conclusion: The risk prediction model for complications after flap repair has certain predictive value, but the overall risk of bias is high, and there is a lack of external validation; thus, it needs to be further enhanced and optimized to increase its prediction accuracy and clinical practicability.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

皮瓣修复术后并发症的风险预测模型:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
目的:系统评价皮瓣修复术后并发症风险预测模型的性能和适用性,为模型的建立和完善提供指导。方法:检索PubMed、Embase、Web of Science、Cochrane Library、CNKI、SinoMed、VIP、万方等网站关于皮瓣并发症风险预测模型的研究。搜索期从成立到2024年12月28日。采用PROBAST工具评价预测模型研究的质量,采用Stata 18软件对模型的预测因子进行meta分析。结果:共纳入16项研究,构建了28个风险预测模型,受试者工作特征曲线下面积(AUC)范围为0.655 ~ 0.964,其中有16个预测模型表现较好(AUC为> 0.7)。11篇文章进行模型校正,16篇内部验证,3篇外部验证。PROBAST审查的结果显示,所有16项研究都存在高偏倚风险。皮瓣并发症发生率为14.8% (95% CI, 10.7 ~ 19.0%)。体重指数(BMI)、吸烟史、皮瓣重建时间长、糖尿病、高血压、术后感染是皮瓣修复术后并发症的独立危险因素(P结论:皮瓣修复术后并发症风险预测模型具有一定的预测价值,但总体偏倚风险较高,缺乏外部验证;因此,需要进一步加强和优化,以提高其预测准确性和临床实用性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMC Surgery
BMC Surgery SURGERY-
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
5.30%
发文量
391
审稿时长
58 days
期刊介绍: BMC Surgery is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on surgical research, training, and practice.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信