Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37811791›Full record

ArticleBJS open2023

Radiomics preoperative-Fistula Risk Score (RAD-FRS) for pancreatoduodenectomy: development and external validation.

Erik W Ingwersen, Jacqueline I Bereska, Alberto Balduzzi, Boris V Janssen, Marc G Besselink, Geert Kazemier, Giovanni Marchegiani, Giuseppe Malleo, Henk A Marquering, C Yung Nio and 8 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BJS open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Response to: Comment on "Risk Models for Developing Pancreatic Fistula After Pancreatoduodenectomy: Validation in a Nationwide Prospective Cohort".Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2024
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Erik W IngwersenDepartment of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-3182-3232
Jacqueline I BereskaDepartment of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Alberto BalduzziDepartment of Surgery and Oncology, Unit of General and Pancreatic Surgery, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-6018-8816
Boris V JanssenDepartment of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Marc G BesselinkDepartment of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-2650-9350
Geert KazemierDepartment of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Giovanni MarchegianiDepartment of Surgery and Oncology, Unit of General and Pancreatic Surgery, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-6824-4533
Giuseppe MalleoDepartment of Surgery and Oncology, Unit of General and Pancreatic Surgery, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-5467-2628
Henk A MarqueringDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
C Yung NioDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Riccardo de RobertisDepartment of Radiology, University Hospital G.B. Rossi, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
Roberto SalviaDepartment of Surgery and Oncology, Unit of General and Pancreatic Surgery, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy.
Ewout W SteyerbergDepartment of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Jaap StokerDepartment of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-9822-3784
Femke StruikDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Inez M VerpalenDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Freek DaamsDepartment of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Pancreatobiliary and Hepatic Artificial Intelligence Research (PHAIR) consortium
Amsterdam University Medical Centers · NLUniversity of Verona · ITLeiden University Medical Center · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAccurately predicting the risk of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy before surgery may assist surgeons in making more informed treatment decisions and improved patient counselling. The aim was to evaluate the predictive accuracy of a radiomics-based preoperative-Fistula Risk Score (RAD-FRS) for clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula.

methodsRadiomic features were derived from preoperative CT scans from adult patients after pancreatoduodenectomy at a single centre in the Netherlands (Amsterdam, 2013-2018) to develop the radiomics-based preoperative-Fistula Risk Score. Extracted radiomic features were analysed with four machine learning classifiers. The model was externally validated in a single centre in Italy (Verona, 2020-2021). The radiomics-based preoperative-Fistula Risk Score was compared with the Fistula Risk Score and the updated alternative Fistula Risk Score.

resultsOverall, 359 patients underwent a pancreatoduodenectomy, of whom 89 (25 per cent) developed a clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula. The radiomics-based preoperative-Fistula Risk Score model was developed using CT scans of 118 patients, of which three radiomic features were included in the random forest model, and externally validated in 57 patients. The model performed well with an area under the curve of 0.90 (95 per cent c.i. 0.71 to 0.99) and 0.81 (95 per cent c.i. 0.69 to 0.92) in the Amsterdam test set and Verona data set respectively. The radiomics-based preoperative-Fistula Risk Score performed similarly to the Fistula Risk Score (area under the curve 0.79) and updated alternative Fistula Risk Score (area under the curve 0.79).

conclusionThe radiomics-based preoperative-Fistula Risk Score, which uses only preoperative CT features, is a new and promising radiomics-based score that has the potential to be integrated with hospital CT report systems and improve patient counselling before surgery. The model with underlying code is readily available via www.pancreascalculator.com and www.github.com/PHAIR-Consortium/POPF-predictor.

Indexed as

Pancreatic FistulaPancreaticoduodenectomyAdultHumansPancreasPostoperative ComplicationsRisk FactorsTomography, X-Ray Computed

Identifiers

PMID37811791
PMCPMC10561131
OpenAlexW4387439407

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.