Tabja Bortesi JP, Ranisau J, Di S, McGillion M, Rosella L, Johnson A, Devereaux PJ, Petch J. Machine Learning Approaches for the Image-Based Identification of Surgical Wound Infections: Scoping Review.
J Med Internet Res 2024;
26:e52880. [PMID:
38236623 PMCID:
PMC10835585 DOI:
10.2196/52880]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/18/2023] [Revised: 11/09/2023] [Accepted: 12/12/2023] [Indexed: 01/19/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Surgical site infections (SSIs) occur frequently and impact patients and health care systems. Remote surveillance of surgical wounds is currently limited by the need for manual assessment by clinicians. Machine learning (ML)-based methods have recently been used to address various aspects of the postoperative wound healing process and may be used to improve the scalability and cost-effectiveness of remote surgical wound assessment.
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this review was to provide an overview of the ML methods that have been used to identify surgical wound infections from images.
METHODS
We conducted a scoping review of ML approaches for visual detection of SSIs following the JBI (Joanna Briggs Institute) methodology. Reports of participants in any postoperative context focusing on identification of surgical wound infections were included. Studies that did not address SSI identification, surgical wounds, or did not use image or video data were excluded. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, CENTRAL, Web of Science Core Collection, IEEE Xplore, Compendex, and arXiv for relevant studies in November 2022. The records retrieved were double screened for eligibility. A data extraction tool was used to chart the relevant data, which was described narratively and presented using tables. Employment of TRIPOD (Transparent Reporting of a Multivariable Prediction Model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis) guidelines was evaluated and PROBAST (Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool) was used to assess risk of bias (RoB).
RESULTS
In total, 10 of the 715 unique records screened met the eligibility criteria. In these studies, the clinical contexts and surgical procedures were diverse. All papers developed diagnostic models, though none performed external validation. Both traditional ML and deep learning methods were used to identify SSIs from mostly color images, and the volume of images used ranged from under 50 to thousands. Further, 10 TRIPOD items were reported in at least 4 studies, though 15 items were reported in fewer than 4 studies. PROBAST assessment led to 9 studies being identified as having an overall high RoB, with 1 study having overall unclear RoB.
CONCLUSIONS
Research on the image-based identification of surgical wound infections using ML remains novel, and there is a need for standardized reporting. Limitations related to variability in image capture, model building, and data sources should be addressed in the future.
Collapse