Artificial Intelligence for Predicting Amputation and Related Outcomes in Peripheral Artery Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q3 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE
Hsin Hsu, Melanie J Wang, Yu-Ying Chu, Yu-Jui Huang, Che-Hsiung Lee
{"title":"Artificial Intelligence for Predicting Amputation and Related Outcomes in Peripheral Artery Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Hsin Hsu, Melanie J Wang, Yu-Ying Chu, Yu-Jui Huang, Che-Hsiung Lee","doi":"10.1016/j.avsg.2026.10.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Peripheral artery disease (PAD) affects over 236 million individuals globally and carries substantial risks of amputation, major adverse limb events (MALE), and mortality. Existing clinical scoring systems focus on short-term surgical outcomes and lack generalizability. Machine learning (ML) has emerged as a promising tool for PAD outcome prediction.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To conduct the first quantitative meta-analysis evaluating the discriminative performance, methodological rigor, and certainty of evidence of ML-based prognostic models for adverse limb outcomes in PAD.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Following PRISMA/PRISMA-S guidelines, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched from inception through March 15, 2026. Two reviewers independently performed study selection, data extraction, and PROBAST risk-of-bias assessment. Random-effects meta-analysis (DerSimonian-Laird with Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman correction) and hierarchical summary ROC (HSROC) analysis were performed; certainty was rated with GRADE.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ten studies were included. The pooled AUC for amputation-related outcomes was 0.88 (95% CI, 0.83-0.94; prediction interval, 0.79-0.98) with substantial heterogeneity (I<sup>2</sup> = 95.4%). HSROC yielded pooled sensitivity 0.855 and specificity 0.836. Registry-based studies showed higher pooled AUC than non-registry studies (0.92 vs 0.80; p = 0.004). All models had high or unclear risk of bias in the analysis domain; none underwent independent external validation. GRADE certainty was very low.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>ML models demonstrate high discriminative performance for predicting amputation-related outcomes in PAD, but very low certainty of evidence, absence of external validation, and high risk of bias currently limit clinical implementation. Prospective multicenter validation and adherence to AI reporting guidelines are essential before clinical translation.</p>","PeriodicalId":8061,"journal":{"name":"Annals of vascular surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of vascular surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avsg.2026.10.003","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Peripheral artery disease (PAD) affects over 236 million individuals globally and carries substantial risks of amputation, major adverse limb events (MALE), and mortality. Existing clinical scoring systems focus on short-term surgical outcomes and lack generalizability. Machine learning (ML) has emerged as a promising tool for PAD outcome prediction.

Objective: To conduct the first quantitative meta-analysis evaluating the discriminative performance, methodological rigor, and certainty of evidence of ML-based prognostic models for adverse limb outcomes in PAD.

Methods: Following PRISMA/PRISMA-S guidelines, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched from inception through March 15, 2026. Two reviewers independently performed study selection, data extraction, and PROBAST risk-of-bias assessment. Random-effects meta-analysis (DerSimonian-Laird with Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman correction) and hierarchical summary ROC (HSROC) analysis were performed; certainty was rated with GRADE.

Results: Ten studies were included. The pooled AUC for amputation-related outcomes was 0.88 (95% CI, 0.83-0.94; prediction interval, 0.79-0.98) with substantial heterogeneity (I2 = 95.4%). HSROC yielded pooled sensitivity 0.855 and specificity 0.836. Registry-based studies showed higher pooled AUC than non-registry studies (0.92 vs 0.80; p = 0.004). All models had high or unclear risk of bias in the analysis domain; none underwent independent external validation. GRADE certainty was very low.

Conclusions: ML models demonstrate high discriminative performance for predicting amputation-related outcomes in PAD, but very low certainty of evidence, absence of external validation, and high risk of bias currently limit clinical implementation. Prospective multicenter validation and adherence to AI reporting guidelines are essential before clinical translation.

人工智能预测外周动脉疾病截肢和相关结果:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
背景:外周动脉疾病(PAD)影响全球超过2.36亿人,具有截肢、主要肢体不良事件(MALE)和死亡的重大风险。现有的临床评分系统侧重于短期手术结果,缺乏通用性。机器学习(ML)已成为PAD结果预测的一个有前途的工具。目的:进行首次定量荟萃分析,评估基于ml的PAD患者不良肢体结局预后模型的判别性能、方法学严谨性和证据确定性。方法:按照PRISMA/PRISMA- s指南,检索PubMed、Embase、Cochrane Library和Web of Science,检索时间为2026年3月15日。两名评论者独立进行研究选择、数据提取和PROBAST偏倚风险评估。随机效应荟萃分析(DerSimonian-Laird + Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman校正)和分层汇总ROC (HSROC)分析;确定性被评为GRADE。结果:纳入10项研究。截肢相关结果的综合AUC为0.88 (95% CI, 0.83-0.94;预测区间,0.79-0.98),异质性显著(I2 = 95.4%)。HSROC的总敏感性为0.855,特异性为0.836。基于注册表的研究显示合并AUC高于非注册表研究(0.92 vs 0.80; p = 0.004)。所有模型在分析领域都有较高或不明确的偏倚风险;没有进行独立的外部验证。GRADE确定性非常低。结论:ML模型在预测PAD截肢相关结果方面表现出高判别性,但证据确定性极低、缺乏外部验证和高偏倚风险目前限制了临床应用。在临床翻译之前,前瞻性多中心验证和遵守人工智能报告指南是必不可少的。
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
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
13.30%
发文量
603
审稿时长
50 days
期刊介绍: Annals of Vascular Surgery, published eight times a year, invites original manuscripts reporting clinical and experimental work in vascular surgery for peer review. Articles may be submitted for the following sections of the journal: Clinical Research (reports of clinical series, new drug or medical device trials) Basic Science Research (new investigations, experimental work) Case Reports (reports on a limited series of patients) General Reviews (scholarly review of the existing literature on a relevant topic) Developments in Endovascular and Endoscopic Surgery Selected Techniques (technical maneuvers) Historical Notes (interesting vignettes from the early days of vascular surgery) Editorials/Correspondence
×
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
小红书