» Articles » PMID: 38265563

Machine Learning Can Predict Anterior Elevation After Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: A New Tool for Daily Outpatient Clinic?

Overview
Date 2024 Jan 24
PMID 38265563
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The aim of the present study was to individuate and compare specific machine learning algorithms that could predict postoperative anterior elevation score after reverse shoulder arthroplasty surgery at different time points. Data from 105 patients who underwent reverse shoulder arthroplasty at the same institute have been collected with the purpose of generating algorithms which could predict the target. Twenty-eight features were extracted and applied to two different machine learning techniques: Linear regression and support vector regression (SVR). These two techniques were also compared in order to define to most faithfully predictive. Using the extracted features, the SVR algorithm resulted in a mean absolute error (MAE) of 11.6° and a classification accuracy (PCC) of 0.88 on the test-set. Linear regression, instead, resulted in a MAE of 13.0° and a PCC of 0.85 on the test-set. Our machine learning study demonstrates that machine learning could provide high predictive algorithms for anterior elevation after reverse shoulder arthroplasty. The differential analysis between the utilized techniques showed higher accuracy in prediction for the support vector regression. Level of Evidence III: Retrospective cohort comparison; Computer Modeling.

Citing Articles

Comparison of Machine Learning Algorithms and Hybrid Computational Intelligence Algorithms for Rehabilitation Classification and Prognosis in Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty.

Vrouva S, Koumantakis G, Sopidou V, Tatsios P, Raptis C, Adamopoulos A Bioengineering (Basel). 2025; 12(2).

PMID: 40001670 PMC: 11851582. DOI: 10.3390/bioengineering12020150.


Machine learning in shoulder arthroplasty : a systematic review of predictive analytics applications.

Schneller T, Kraus M, Schatz J, Moroder P, Scheibel M, Lazaridou A Bone Jt Open. 2025; 6(2):126-134.

PMID: 39900101 PMC: 11790313. DOI: 10.1302/2633-1462.62.BJO-2024-0234.R1.

References
1.
Handelman G, Kok H, Chandra R, Razavi A, Lee M, Asadi H . eDoctor: machine learning and the future of medicine. J Intern Med. 2018; 284(6):603-619. DOI: 10.1111/joim.12822. View

2.
Jordan M, Mitchell T . Machine learning: Trends, perspectives, and prospects. Science. 2015; 349(6245):255-60. DOI: 10.1126/science.aaa8415. View

3.
Weiss J, Kuusisto F, Boyd K, Liu J, Page D . Machine Learning for Treatment Assignment: Improving Individualized Risk Attribution. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2016; 2015:1306-15. PMC: 4765638. View

4.
Cabitza F, Locoro A, Banfi G . Machine Learning in Orthopedics: A Literature Review. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2018; 6:75. PMC: 6030383. DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2018.00075. View

5.
Myers T, Ramkumar P, Ricciardi B, Urish K, Kipper J, Ketonis C . Artificial Intelligence and Orthopaedics: An Introduction for Clinicians. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2020; 102(9):830-840. PMC: 7508289. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.19.01128. View