Department of Orthopaedics, Suzhou Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Suzhou, 234000, Anhui, China.
Department of Spinal Surgery, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, 266000, Shandong, China.
Aging Clin Exp Res. 2023 Nov;35(11):2643-2656. doi: 10.1007/s40520-023-02550-4. Epub 2023 Sep 21.
Anemia is one of the common adverse reactions after hip fracture surgery. The traditional method to solve anemia is allogeneic transfusion. However, the transfusion may lead to some complications such as septicemia and fever. So far, few studies have reported roles of machine learning in predicting whether blood transfusion is needed or not after hip fracture surgery. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to develop machine learning models to predict the likelihood of postoperative blood transfusion in patients undergoing hip fracture surgery.
This study enrolled 1355 patients who underwent hip fracture surgery at the Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University from January 2016 to December 2021. Among all patients, 210 cases received postoperative blood transfusion. All patients were randomly divided into a training group and a testing group at a ratio of 7:3. In the training group, univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to determine independent risk factors for the postoperative transfusion. Then, based on these independent risk factors, tenfold cross-validation method was utilized to develop five machine learning models, including logistic, multilayer perceptron (MLP), extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), random forest (RF), and support vector machine (SVM). The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, area under ROC curve (AUC), and Matthews correlation coefficient (MCC) were generated to evaluate the performance of the models. Calibration plot and decision curve analysis (DCA) were used to test the performance, stability, and clinical applicability of the models. The models were validated using the testing group; and the ROC curve, MCC, calibration plot, and DCA curves were also generated to validate the performance, stability, and clinical applicability of the models. To further verify the robustness of the model, we randomly grabbed 70% of the samples in the testing set, performed 1000 iterations, and calculated the AUC and confidence interval of the five models. Finally, we used SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) to explain these models.
Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that there were 8 independent risk factors, including age, blood transfusion history, albumin (ALB), globulin (GLO), total bilirubin (TBIL), indirect bilirubin (IBIL), hemoglobin (HB), and blood loss > 200 ml. We finally selected five independent risk factors including HB, GLO, age, IBIL, and blood loss > 200 ml. Based on these five independent risk factors, we generated six characteristic variables, namely HB, HB × HB, HB × blood loss, GLO × HB, age, age × IBIL, and established five machine learning models using a tenfold cross-validation method. In the training group, the AUC values of logistic, RF, MLP, SVM, and XGB were 0.9320, 0.8911, 0.9327, 0.9225, and 0.8825, respectively, and the average AUC was 0.9122 ± 0.0212. The MCC values were 0.65, 0.77, 0.65, 0.66, and 0.68, respectively, and the calibration plot and DCA performed well. In the testing group the AUC values of logistic, RF, MLP, SVM, and XGB were 0.8483, 0.7978, 0.8576, 0.8598, and 0.8216, respectively. The average AUC was 0.8370 ± 0.0238, and the MCC values were 0.41, 0.35, 0.40, 0.41, and 0.41, respectively. The calibration plot and DCA in the testing group also showed good performance. The AUC values and confidence intervals of the 1000-iteration model were: logistic (AUC, min confidence interval [CI]-max confidence interval [CI] 0.848, 0.804-0.903), RF (AUC, minCI-maxCI 0.797, 0.734-0.857), MLP (AUC, minCI-maxCI 0.858, 0.812-0.902), SVM (AUC, minCI-maxCI 0.859, 0.819-0.910), and XGB (AUC, minCI-maxCI 0.821, 0.764-0.894). The model performed well. Finally, according to SHAP, among all five models, HB played the most important role in model prediction and interpretation.
The five models we developed all performed well in predicting the likelihood of blood transfusion after hip fracture surgery. Therefore, we believed that the prediction model based on machine learning had great application prospects in clinical practice, which could help clinicians better predict the risk of blood transfusion after hip fracture surgery.
贫血是髋部骨折手术后常见的不良反应之一。传统解决贫血的方法是异体输血。然而,输血可能会导致败血症和发热等并发症。到目前为止,很少有研究报道机器学习在预测髋部骨折手术后是否需要输血方面的作用。因此,本研究的目的是开发机器学习模型来预测髋部骨折手术后患者输血的可能性。
本研究纳入了 2016 年 1 月至 2021 年 12 月期间在青岛大学附属医院接受髋部骨折手术的 1355 例患者。所有患者均随机分为训练组和测试组,比例为 7:3。在训练组中,采用单因素和多因素逻辑回归分析确定术后输血的独立危险因素。然后,基于这些独立危险因素,采用十折交叉验证法开发了五种机器学习模型,包括逻辑回归、多层感知机(MLP)、极端梯度提升(XGBoost)、随机森林(RF)和支持向量机(SVM)。生成受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线、ROC 曲线下面积(AUC)和马修斯相关系数(MCC)来评估模型的性能。校准图和决策曲线分析(DCA)用于测试模型的性能、稳定性和临床适用性。使用测试组验证模型;并生成 ROC 曲线、MCC、校准图和 DCA 曲线,以验证模型的性能、稳定性和临床适用性。为了进一步验证模型的稳健性,我们在测试集中随机抓取 70%的样本,进行了 1000 次迭代,并计算了五个模型的 AUC 和置信区间。最后,我们使用 SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) 来解释这些模型。
多因素逻辑回归分析显示,有 8 个独立危险因素,包括年龄、输血史、白蛋白(ALB)、球蛋白(GLO)、总胆红素(TBIL)、间接胆红素(IBIL)、血红蛋白(HB)和出血量>200ml。我们最终选择了 5 个独立危险因素,包括 HB、GLO、年龄、IBIL 和出血量>200ml。基于这 5 个独立危险因素,我们生成了 6 个特征变量,即 HB、HB×HB、HB×出血量、GLO×HB、年龄和年龄×IBIL,并使用十折交叉验证法建立了五个机器学习模型。在训练组中,逻辑、RF、MLP、SVM 和 XGB 的 AUC 值分别为 0.9320、0.8911、0.9327、0.9225 和 0.8825,平均 AUC 为 0.9122±0.0212。MCC 值分别为 0.65、0.77、0.65、0.66 和 0.68,校准图和 DCA 表现良好。在测试组中,逻辑、RF、MLP、SVM 和 XGB 的 AUC 值分别为 0.8483、0.7978、0.8576、0.8598 和 0.8216,平均 AUC 为 0.8370±0.0238,MCC 值分别为 0.41、0.35、0.40、0.41 和 0.41,校准图和 DCA 也表现良好。在测试组中,模型的 AUC 值和置信区间为:逻辑(AUC,最小置信区间[CI]-最大置信区间[CI] 0.848,0.804-0.903)、RF(AUC,最小 CI-最大 CI 0.797,0.734-0.857)、MLP(AUC,最小 CI-最大 CI 0.858,0.812-0.902)、SVM(AUC,最小 CI-最大 CI 0.859,0.819-0.910)和 XGB(AUC,最小 CI-最大 CI 0.821,0.764-0.894)。模型表现良好。最后,根据 SHAP,在所有五个模型中,HB 在模型预测和解释中起着最重要的作用。
我们开发的五个模型在预测髋部骨折手术后输血的可能性方面均表现良好。因此,我们认为基于机器学习的预测模型在临床实践中具有广阔的应用前景,可以帮助临床医生更好地预测髋部骨折手术后的输血风险。