Development of Risk Stratification Predictive Models for Cervical Deformity Surgery

Development and external validation of a predictive model for prolonged length of hospital stay in elderly patients undergoing lumbar fusion surgery: comparison of three predictive models

PURPOSE

This study aimed to develop a predictive model for prolonged length of hospital stay (pLOS) in elderly patients undergoing lumbar fusion surgery, utilizing multivariate logistic regression, single classification and regression tree (hereafter, "classification tree") and random forest machine-learning algorithms.

METHODS

This study was a retrospective review of a prospective Geriatric Lumbar Disease Database. The primary outcome measure was pLOS, which was defined as the LOS greater than the 75th percentile. All patients were grouped as pLOS group and non-pLOS. Three models (including logistic regression, single-classification tree and random forest algorithms) for predicting pLOS were developed using training dataset and internal validation using testing dataset. Finally, online tool based on our model was developed to assess its validity in the clinical setting (external validation).

RESULTS

The development set included 1025 patients (mean [SD] age, 72.8 [5.6] years; 632 [61.7%] female), and the external validation set included 175 patients (73.2 [5.9] years; 97[55.4%] female). Multivariate logistic analyses revealed that older age (odds ratio [OR] 1.06, p < 0.001), higher BMI (OR 1.08, p = 0.002), number of fused segments (OR 1.41, p < 0.001), longer operative time (OR 1.02, p < 0.001), and diabetes (OR 1.05, p = 0.046) were independent risk factors for pLOS in elderly patients undergoing lumbar fusion surgery. The single-classification tree revealed that operative time ≥ 232 min, delayed ambulation, and BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2 as particularly influential predictors for pLOS. A random forest model was developed using the remaining 14 variables. Intraoperative EBL, operative time, delayed ambulation, age, number of fused segments, BMI, and RBC count were the most significant variables in the final model. The predictive ability of our three models was comparable, with no significant differences in AUC (0.73 vs. 0.71 vs. 0.70, respectively). The logistic regression model had a higher net benefit for clinical intervention than the other models. The nomogram was developed, and the C-index of external validation for PLOS was 0.69 (95% CI, 0.65-0.76).

CONCLUSION

This investigation produced three predictive models for pLOS in elderly patients undergoing lumbar fusion surgery. The predictive ability of our three models was comparable. Logistic regression model had a higher net benefit for clinical intervention than the other models. Our predictive model could inform physicians about elderly patients with a high risk of pLOS after surgery.

Development and external validation of a nomogram for predicting postoperative adverse events in elderly patients undergoing lumbar fusion surgery: comparison of three predictive models

BACKGROUND

The burden of lumbar degenerative diseases (LDD) has increased substantially with the unprecedented aging population. Identifying elderly patients with high risk of postoperative adverse events (AEs) and establishing individualized perioperative management is critical to mitigate added costs and optimize cost-effectiveness to the healthcare system. We aimed to develop a predictive tool for AEs in elderly patients with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), utilizing multivariate logistic regression, single classification and regression tree (hereafter, "classification tree"), and random forest machine learning algorithms.

METHODS

This study was a retrospective review of a prospective Geriatric Lumbar Disease Database (age ≥ 65). Our outcome measure was postoperative AEs, including prolonged hospital stays, postoperative complications, readmission, and reoperation within 90 days. Patients were grouped as either having at least one adverse event (AEs group) or not (No-AEs group). Three models for predicting postoperative AEs were developed using training dataset and internal validation using testing dataset. Finally, online tool was developed to assess its validity in the clinical setting (external validation).

RESULTS

The development set included 1025 patients (mean [SD] age, 72.8 [5.6] years; 632 [61.7%] female), and the external validation set included 175 patients (73.2 [5.9] years; 97 [55.4%] female). The predictive ability of our three models was comparable, with no significant differences in AUC (0.73 vs. 0.72 vs. 0.70, respectively). The logistic regression model had a higher net benefit for clinical intervention than the other models. A nomogram based on logistic regression was developed, and the C-index of external validation for AEs was 0.69 (95% CI 0.65-0.76).

CONCLUSION

The predictive ability of our three models was comparable. Logistic regression model had a higher net benefit for clinical intervention than the other models. Our nomogram and online tool ( https://xuanwumodel.shinyapps.io/Model_for_AEs/ ) could inform physicians about elderly patients with a high risk of AEs within the 90 days after TLIF surgery.