原发性选择性全髋关节置换术后股骨假体周围骨折导致假体失效风险的预测:基于瑞典关节置换术登记的154,519例全髋关节置换术的简化和验证模型。

IF 4.7 2区 医学 Q2 CELL & TISSUE ENGINEERING
M Abdulhadi Alagha, Justin Cobb, Alexander D Liddle, Henrik Malchau, Ola Rolfson, Maziar Mohaddes
{"title":"原发性选择性全髋关节置换术后股骨假体周围骨折导致假体失效风险的预测:基于瑞典关节置换术登记的154,519例全髋关节置换术的简化和验证模型。","authors":"M Abdulhadi Alagha, Justin Cobb, Alexander D Liddle, Henrik Malchau, Ola Rolfson, Maziar Mohaddes","doi":"10.1302/2046-3758.141.BJR-2024-0134.R1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>While cementless fixation offers potential advantages over cemented fixation, such as a shorter operating time, concerns linger over its higher cost and increased risk of periprosthetic fractures. If the risk of fracture can be forecasted, it would aid the shared decision-making process related to cementless stems. Our study aimed to develop and validate predictive models of periprosthetic femoral fracture (PPFF) necessitating revision and reoperation after elective total hip arthroplasty (THA).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We included 154,519 primary elective THAs from the Swedish Arthroplasty Register (SAR), encompassing 21 patient-, surgical-, and implant-specific features, for model derivation and validation in predicting 30-day, 60-day, 90-day, and one-year revision and reoperation due to PPFF. Model performance was tested using the area under the curve (AUC), and feature importance was identified in the best-performing algorithm.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The Lasso regression excelled in predicting 30-day revisions (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) = 0.85), while the Gradient Boosting Machine (GBM) model outperformed other models by a slight margin for all remaining endpoints (AUC range: 0.79 to 0.86). Predictive factors for revision and reoperation were identified, with patient features such as increasing age, higher American Society of Anesthesiologists grade (> III), and World Health Organization obesity classes II to III associated with elevated risks. A preoperative diagnosis of idiopathic necrosis increased revision risk. Concerning implant design, factors such as cementless femoral fixation, reverse-hybrid fixation, hip resurfacing, and small (< 35 mm) or large (> 52 mm) femoral heads increased both revision and reoperation risks.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This is the first study to develop machine-learning models to forecast the risk of PPFF necessitating secondary surgery. Future studies are required to externally validate our algorithm and assess its applicability in clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":9074,"journal":{"name":"Bone & Joint Research","volume":"14 1","pages":"46-57"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11756933/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prediction of implant failure risk due to periprosthetic femoral fracture after primary elective total hip arthroplasty : a simplified and validated model based on 154,519 total hip arthroplasties from the Swedish Arthroplasty Register.\",\"authors\":\"M Abdulhadi Alagha, Justin Cobb, Alexander D Liddle, Henrik Malchau, Ola Rolfson, Maziar Mohaddes\",\"doi\":\"10.1302/2046-3758.141.BJR-2024-0134.R1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>While cementless fixation offers potential advantages over cemented fixation, such as a shorter operating time, concerns linger over its higher cost and increased risk of periprosthetic fractures. If the risk of fracture can be forecasted, it would aid the shared decision-making process related to cementless stems. Our study aimed to develop and validate predictive models of periprosthetic femoral fracture (PPFF) necessitating revision and reoperation after elective total hip arthroplasty (THA).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We included 154,519 primary elective THAs from the Swedish Arthroplasty Register (SAR), encompassing 21 patient-, surgical-, and implant-specific features, for model derivation and validation in predicting 30-day, 60-day, 90-day, and one-year revision and reoperation due to PPFF. Model performance was tested using the area under the curve (AUC), and feature importance was identified in the best-performing algorithm.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The Lasso regression excelled in predicting 30-day revisions (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) = 0.85), while the Gradient Boosting Machine (GBM) model outperformed other models by a slight margin for all remaining endpoints (AUC range: 0.79 to 0.86). Predictive factors for revision and reoperation were identified, with patient features such as increasing age, higher American Society of Anesthesiologists grade (> III), and World Health Organization obesity classes II to III associated with elevated risks. A preoperative diagnosis of idiopathic necrosis increased revision risk. Concerning implant design, factors such as cementless femoral fixation, reverse-hybrid fixation, hip resurfacing, and small (< 35 mm) or large (> 52 mm) femoral heads increased both revision and reoperation risks.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This is the first study to develop machine-learning models to forecast the risk of PPFF necessitating secondary surgery. Future studies are required to externally validate our algorithm and assess its applicability in clinical practice.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9074,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bone & Joint Research\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"46-57\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11756933/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bone & Joint Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1302/2046-3758.141.BJR-2024-0134.R1\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CELL & TISSUE ENGINEERING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bone & Joint Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1302/2046-3758.141.BJR-2024-0134.R1","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CELL & TISSUE ENGINEERING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:与骨水泥固定相比,无骨水泥固定具有潜在的优势,如更短的手术时间,但其较高的成本和假体周围骨折的风险增加仍然令人担忧。如果能够预测骨折风险,将有助于无水泥茎的共同决策过程。本研究旨在建立和验证股骨假体周围骨折(PPFF)在选择性全髋关节置换术(THA)后需要翻修和再手术的预测模型。方法:我们从瑞典关节成形术登记(SAR)中纳入154,519例主要选择性tha,包括21例患者、手术和植入物特异性特征,用于模型推导和验证预测PPFF 30天、60天、90天和1年的翻修和再手术。使用曲线下面积(AUC)测试模型性能,并在性能最佳的算法中识别特征重要性。结果:Lasso回归在预测30天的修订(受试者工作特征曲线下面积(AUC) = 0.85)方面表现出色,而梯度增强机(GBM)模型在所有剩余终点(AUC范围:0.79至0.86)上的表现略优于其他模型。确定了翻修和再手术的预测因素,患者的特征如年龄增加、美国麻醉医师协会分级(b> III)较高以及世界卫生组织肥胖等级II至III与风险升高相关。术前诊断为特发性坏死增加了翻修风险。在假体设计方面,诸如无骨水泥股骨固定、反向混合固定、髋关节表面置换术、小(< 35 mm)或大(> 52 mm)股骨头等因素增加了翻修和再手术的风险。结论:这是第一个开发机器学习模型来预测PPFF需要二次手术的风险的研究。未来的研究需要外部验证我们的算法,并评估其在临床实践中的适用性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Prediction of implant failure risk due to periprosthetic femoral fracture after primary elective total hip arthroplasty : a simplified and validated model based on 154,519 total hip arthroplasties from the Swedish Arthroplasty Register.

Aims: While cementless fixation offers potential advantages over cemented fixation, such as a shorter operating time, concerns linger over its higher cost and increased risk of periprosthetic fractures. If the risk of fracture can be forecasted, it would aid the shared decision-making process related to cementless stems. Our study aimed to develop and validate predictive models of periprosthetic femoral fracture (PPFF) necessitating revision and reoperation after elective total hip arthroplasty (THA).

Methods: We included 154,519 primary elective THAs from the Swedish Arthroplasty Register (SAR), encompassing 21 patient-, surgical-, and implant-specific features, for model derivation and validation in predicting 30-day, 60-day, 90-day, and one-year revision and reoperation due to PPFF. Model performance was tested using the area under the curve (AUC), and feature importance was identified in the best-performing algorithm.

Results: The Lasso regression excelled in predicting 30-day revisions (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) = 0.85), while the Gradient Boosting Machine (GBM) model outperformed other models by a slight margin for all remaining endpoints (AUC range: 0.79 to 0.86). Predictive factors for revision and reoperation were identified, with patient features such as increasing age, higher American Society of Anesthesiologists grade (> III), and World Health Organization obesity classes II to III associated with elevated risks. A preoperative diagnosis of idiopathic necrosis increased revision risk. Concerning implant design, factors such as cementless femoral fixation, reverse-hybrid fixation, hip resurfacing, and small (< 35 mm) or large (> 52 mm) femoral heads increased both revision and reoperation risks.

Conclusion: This is the first study to develop machine-learning models to forecast the risk of PPFF necessitating secondary surgery. Future studies are required to externally validate our algorithm and assess its applicability in clinical practice.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Bone & Joint Research
Bone & Joint Research CELL & TISSUE ENGINEERING-ORTHOPEDICS
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
23.90%
发文量
156
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: The gold open access journal for the musculoskeletal sciences. Included in PubMed and available in PubMed Central.
×
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