Patterns of inpatient acute care and emergency department utilization within one year post-initial amputation among individuals with dysvascular major lower extremity amputation in Ontario, Canada: A population-based retrospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Lower extremity amputation (LEA) is a life altering procedure, with significant negative impacts to patients, care partners, and the overall health system. There are gaps in knowledge with respect to patterns of healthcare utilization following LEA due to dysvascular etiology. OBJECTIVE: To examine inpatient acute and emergency department (ED) healthcare utilization among an incident cohort of individuals with major dysvascular LEA 1 year post-initial amputation; and to identify factors associated with acute care readmissions and ED visits. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using population-level administrative data. SETTING: Ontario, Canada. POPULATION: Adults individuals (18 years or older) with a major dysvascular LEA between April 1, 2004 and March 31, 2018. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Acute care hospitalizations and ED visits within one year post-initial discharge. RESULTS: A total of 10,905 individuals with major dysvascular LEA were identified (67.7% male). There were 14,363 acute hospitalizations and 19,660 ED visits within one year post-discharge from initial amputation acute stay. The highest common risk factors across all the models included age of 65 years or older (versus less than 65 years), high comorbidity (versus low), and low and moderate continuity of care (versus high). Sex differences were identified for risk factors for hospitalizations, with differences in the types of comorbidities increasing risk and geographical setting. CONCLUSION: Persons with LEA were generally more at risk for acute hospitalizations and ED visits if higher comorbidity and lower continuity of care. Clinical care efforts might focus on improving transitions from the acute setting such as coordinated and integrated care for sub-populations with LEA who are more at risk.

Recommendations for Recovery of the COVID-19 Pandemic-related Diagnostic, Screening, and Procedure Backlog in Ontario: A Survey of Healthcare Leaders.

PURPOSE: The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in a significant diagnostic, screening, and procedure backlog in Ontario. Engagement of key stakeholders in healthcare leadership positions is urgently needed to inform a comprehensive provincial recovery strategy. METHODS: A list of 20 policy recommendations addressing the diagnostic, screening and procedure backlog in Ontario were transformed into a national online survey. Policy recommendations were rated on a 7-point Likert scale (strongly agree to strongly disagree) and organized into those retained (≥75% strongly agree to somewhat agree), discarded (≥80% somewhat disagree to strongly disagree), and no consensus reached. Survey participants included a diverse sample of healthcare leaders with the potential to impact policy reform. RESULTS: Of 56 healthcare leaders invited to participate, there were 34 unique responses (61% response rate). Participants were from diverse clinical backgrounds, including surgical subspecialties, medicine, nursing, and healthcare administration and held institutional or provincial leadership positions. A total of 11 of 20 policy recommendations reached the threshold for consensus agreement with the remaining 9 having no consensus reached. CONCLUSION: Consensus agreement was reached among Canadian healthcare leaders on 11 policy recommendations to address the diagnostic, screening, and procedure backlog in Ontario. Recommendations included strategies to address patient information needs on expected wait times, expand health and human resource capacity, and streamline efficiencies to increase operating room output. No consensus was reached on the optimal funding strategy within the public system in Ontario or the appropriateness of implementing private funding models.

Hospital volume-outcome relationships for robot-assisted surgeries: a population-based analysis.

BACKGROUND: Associations between procedure volumes and outcomes can inform minimum volume standards and the regionalization of health services. Robot-assisted surgery continues to expand globally; however, data are limited regarding which hospitals should be using the technology. STUDY DESIGN: Using administrative health data for all residents of Ontario, Canada, this retrospective cohort study included adult patients who underwent a robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), total robotic hysterectomy (TRH), robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN), or robotic portal lobectomy using 4 arms (RPL-4) between January 2010 and September 2021. Associations between yearly hospital volumes and 90-day major complications were evaluated using multivariable logistic regression models adjusted for patient characteristics and clustering at the level of the hospital. RESULTS: A total of 10,879 patients were included, with 7567, 1776, 724, and 812 undergoing a RARP, TRH, RAPN, and RPL-4, respectively. Yearly hospital volume was not associated with 90-day complications for any procedure. Doubling of yearly volume was associated with a 17-min decrease in operative time for RARP (95% confidence interval [CI] - 23 to - 10), 8-min decrease for RAPN (95% CI - 14 to - 2), 24-min decrease for RPL-4 (95% CI - 29 to - 19), and no significant change for TRH (- 7 min; 95% CI - 17 to 3). CONCLUSION: The risk of 90-day major complications does not appear to be higher in low volume hospitals; however, they may not be as efficient with operating room utilization. Careful case selection may have contributed to the lack of an observed association between volumes and complications.

Ambulatory Cardiology or General Internal Medicine Assessment Prior to Scheduled Major Vascular Surgery is Associated with Improved Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize the association between ambulatory cardiology or general internal medicine (GIM) assessment prior to surgery and outcomes following scheduled major vascular surgery. BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular risk assessment and management prior to high-risk surgery remains an evolving area of care. METHODS: This is population-based retrospective cohort study of all adults who underwent scheduled major vascular surgery in Ontario, Canada, April 1, 2004-March 31, 2019. Patients who had an ambulatory cardiology and/or GIM assessment within 6 months prior to surgery were compared to those who did not. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included: composite of 30-day mortality, myocardial infarction or stroke; 30-day cardiovascular death; 1-year mortality; composite of 1-year mortality, myocardial infarction or stroke; and 1-year cardiovascular death. Cox proportional hazard regression using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to mitigate confounding by indication. RESULTS: Among 50,228 patients, 20,484 (40.8%) underwent an ambulatory assessment prior to surgery: 11,074 (54.1%) with cardiology, 8,071 (39.4%) with GIM and 1,339 (6.5%) with both. Compared to patients who did not, those who underwent an assessment had a higher Revised Cardiac Risk Index (N with Index over 2= 4,989[24.4%] vs. 4,587[15.4%], P<0.001) and more frequent pre-operative cardiac testing (N=7,772[37.9%] vs. 6,113[20.6%], P<0.001) but, lower 30-day mortality (N=551[2.7%] vs. 970[3.3%], P<0.001). After application of IPTW, cardiology or GIM assessment prior to surgery remained associated with a lower 30-day mortality (weighted Hazard Ratio [95%CI] = 0.73 [0.65-0.82]) and a lower rate of all secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Major vascular surgery patients assessed by a cardiology or GIM physician prior to surgery have better outcomes than those who are not. Further research is needed to better understand potential mechanisms of benefit.

Predicting Outcomes Following Lower Extremity Endovascular Revascularization Using Machine Learning.

BACKGROUND: Lower extremity endovascular revascularization for peripheral artery disease carries nonnegligible perioperative risks; however, outcome prediction tools remain limited. Using machine learning, we developed automated algorithms that predict 30-day outcomes following lower extremity endovascular revascularization. METHODS AND RESULTS: The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program targeted vascular database was used to identify patients who underwent lower extremity endovascular revascularization (angioplasty, stent, or atherectomy) for peripheral artery disease between 2011 and 2021. Input features included 38 preoperative demographic/clinical variables. The primary outcome was 30-day postprocedural major adverse limb event (composite of major reintervention, untreated loss of patency, or major amputation) or death. Data were split into training (70%) and test (30%) sets. Using 10-fold cross-validation, 6 machine learning models were trained using preoperative features. The primary model evaluation metric was area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. Overall, 21 886 patients were included, and 30-day major adverse limb event/death occurred in 1964 (9.0%) individuals. The best performing model for predicting 30-day major adverse limb event/death was extreme gradient boosting, achieving an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.93 (95% CI, 0.92-0.94). In comparison, logistic regression had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.72 (95% CI, 0.70-0.74). The calibration plot showed good agreement between predicted and observed event probabilities with a Brier score of 0.09. The top 3 predictive features in our algorithm were (1) chronic limb-threatening ischemia, (2) tibial intervention, and (3) congestive heart failure. CONCLUSIONS: Our machine learning models accurately predict 30-day outcomes following lower extremity endovascular revascularization using preoperative data with good discrimination and calibration. Prospective validation is warranted to assess for generalizability and external validity.

Machine Learning to Predict Outcomes of Endovascular Intervention for Patients With PAD.

Importance: Endovascular intervention for peripheral artery disease (PAD) carries nonnegligible perioperative risks; however, outcome prediction tools are limited. Objective: To develop machine learning (ML) algorithms that can predict outcomes following endovascular intervention for PAD. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prognostic study included patients who underwent endovascular intervention for PAD between January 1, 2004, and July 5, 2023, with 1 year of follow-up. Data were obtained from the Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI), a multicenter registry containing data from vascular surgeons and interventionalists at more than 1000 academic and community hospitals. From an initial cohort of 262 242 patients, 26 565 were excluded due to treatment for acute limb ischemia (n = 14 642) or aneurysmal disease (n = 3456), unreported symptom status (n = 4401) or procedure type (n = 2319), or concurrent bypass (n = 1747). Data were split into training (70%) and test (30%) sets. Exposures: A total of 112 predictive features (75 preoperative [demographic and clinical], 24 intraoperative [procedural], and 13 postoperative [in-hospital course and complications]) from the index hospitalization were identified. Main Outcomes and Measures: Using 10-fold cross-validation, 6 ML models were trained using preoperative features to predict 1-year major adverse limb event (MALE; composite of thrombectomy or thrombolysis, surgical reintervention, or major amputation) or death. The primary model evaluation metric was area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). After selecting the best performing algorithm, additional models were built using intraoperative and postoperative data. Results: Overall, 235 677 patients who underwent endovascular intervention for PAD were included (mean [SD] age, 68.4 [11.1] years; 94 979 [40.3%] female) and 71 683 (30.4%) developed 1-year MALE or death. The best preoperative prediction model was extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), achieving the following performance metrics: AUROC, 0.94 (95% CI, 0.93-0.95); accuracy, 0.86 (95% CI, 0.85-0.87); sensitivity, 0.87; specificity, 0.85; positive predictive value, 0.85; and negative predictive value, 0.87. In comparison, logistic regression had an AUROC of 0.67 (95% CI, 0.65-0.69). The XGBoost model maintained excellent performance at the intraoperative and postoperative stages, with AUROCs of 0.94 (95% CI, 0.93-0.95) and 0.98 (95% CI, 0.97-0.99), respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: In this prognostic study, ML models were developed that accurately predicted outcomes following endovascular intervention for PAD, which performed better than logistic regression. These algorithms have potential for important utility in guiding perioperative risk-mitigation strategies to prevent adverse outcomes following endovascular intervention for PAD.

Development and Testing of Step, Error, and Event Frameworks to Evaluate Technical Performance in Peripheral Endovascular Interventions.

OBJECTIVE: Tools for endovascular performance assessment are necessary in competency based education. This study aimed to develop and test a detailed analysis tool to assess steps, errors, and events in peripheral endovascular interventions (PVI). METHODS: A modified Delphi consensus was used to identify steps, errors, and events in iliac-femoral-popliteal endovascular interventions. International experts in vascular surgery, interventional radiology, cardiology, and angiology were identified, based on their scientific track record. In an initial open ended survey round, experts volunteered a comprehensive list of steps, errors, and events. The items were then rated on a five point Likert scale until consensus was reached with a pre-defined threshold (Cronbach's alpha > 0.7) and > 70% expert agreement. An experienced endovascular surgeon applied the finalised frameworks on 10 previously videorecorded elective PVI cases. RESULTS: The expert consensus panel was formed by 28 of 98 invited proceduralists, consisting of three angiologists, seven interventional radiologists, five cardiologists, and 13 vascular surgeons, with 29% from North America and 71% from Europe. The Delphi process was completed after three rounds (Cronbach's alpha; αsteps = 0.79; αerrors = 0.90; αevents = 0.90), with 15, 26, and 18 items included in the final step (73 - 100% agreement), error (73 - 100% agreement), and event (73 - 100% agreement) frameworks, respectively. The median rating time per case was 4.3 hours (interquartile range [IQR] 3.2, 5 hours). A median of 55 steps (IQR 40, 67), 27 errors (IQR 21, 49), and two events (IQR 1, 6) were identified per case. CONCLUSION: An evaluation tool for the procedural steps, errors, and events in iliac-femoral-popliteal endovascular procedures was developed through a modified Delphi consensus and applied to recorded intra-operative data to identify hazardous steps, common errors, and events. Procedural mastery may be promoted by using the frameworks to provide endovascular proceduralists with detailed technical performance feedback.

Predicting outcomes following lower extremity open revascularization using machine learning.

Lower extremity open revascularization is a treatment option for peripheral artery disease that carries significant peri-operative risks; however, outcome prediction tools remain limited. Using machine learning (ML), we developed automated algorithms that predict 30-day outcomes following lower extremity open revascularization. The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program targeted vascular database was used to identify patients who underwent lower extremity open revascularization for chronic atherosclerotic disease between 2011 and 2021. Input features included 37 pre-operative demographic/clinical variables. The primary outcome was 30-day major adverse limb event (MALE; composite of untreated loss of patency, major reintervention, or major amputation) or death. Our data were split into training (70%) and test (30%) sets. Using tenfold cross-validation, we trained 6 ML models. Overall, 24,309 patients were included. The primary outcome of 30-day MALE or death occurred in 2349 (9.3%) patients. Our best performing prediction model was XGBoost, achieving an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (95% CI) of 0.93 (0.92-0.94). The calibration plot showed good agreement between predicted and observed event probabilities with a Brier score of 0.08. Our ML algorithm has potential for important utility in guiding risk mitigation strategies for patients being considered for lower extremity open revascularization to improve outcomes.

One-time screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm in Ontario, Canada: a model-based cost-utility analysis.

BACKGROUND: Screening programs for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) are not available in Canada. We sought to determine the effectiveness and costutility of AAA screening in Ontario. METHODS: We compared one-time ultrasonography-based AAA screening for people aged 65 years to no screening using a fully probabilistic Markov model with a lifetime horizon. We estimated life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), AAA-related deaths, number needed to screen to prevent 1 AAA-related death and costs (in Canadian dollars) from the perspective of the Ontario Ministry of Health. We retrieved model inputs from literature, Statistics Canada, and the Ontario Case Costing Initiative. RESULTS: Screening reduced AAA-related deaths by 84.9% among males and 81.0% among females. Compared with no screening, screening resulted in 0.04 (18.96 v. 18.92) additional life-years and 0.04 (14.95 v. 14.91) additional QALYs at an incremental cost of $80 per person among males. Among females, screening resulted in 0.02 (21.25 v. 21.23) additional life-years and 0.01 (16.20 v. 16.19) additional QALYs at an incremental cost of $11 per person. At a willingness-to-pay of $50 000 per year, screening was cost-effective in 84% (males) and 90% (females) of model iterations. Screening was increasingly cost-effective with higher AAA prevalence. INTERPRETATION: Screening for AAA among people aged 65 years in Ontario was associated with fewer AAA-related deaths and favourable cost-effectiveness. To maximize QALY gains per dollar spent and AAA-related deaths prevented, AAA screening programs should be designed to ensure that populations with high prevalence of AAA participate.

Predicting Outcomes Following Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair Using Machine Learning.

OBJECTIVE: To develop machine learning (ML) models that predict outcomes following endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). BACKGROUND: EVAR carries non-negligible perioperative risks; however, there are no widely used outcome prediction tools. METHODS: The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program targeted database was used to identify patients who underwent EVAR for infrarenal AAA between 2011 and 2021. Input features included 36 preoperative variables. The primary outcome was 30-day major adverse cardiovascular event (composite of myocardial infarction, stroke, or death). Data were split into training (70%) and test (30%) sets. Using 10-fold cross-validation, 6 ML models were trained using preoperative features. The primary model evaluation metric was area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. Model robustness was evaluated with calibration plot and Brier score. Subgroup analysis was performed to assess model performance based on age, sex, race, ethnicity, and prior AAA repair. RESULTS: Overall, 16,282 patients were included. The primary outcome of 30-day major adverse cardiovascular event occurred in 390 (2.4%) patients. Our best-performing prediction model was XGBoost, achieving an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (95% CI) of 0.95 (0.94-0.96) compared with logistic regression [0.72 [0.70-0.74)]. The calibration plot showed good agreement between predicted and observed event probabilities with a Brier score of 0.06. Model performance remained robust on all subgroup analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Our newer ML models accurately predict 30-day outcomes following EVAR using preoperative data and perform better than logistic regression. Our automated algorithms can guide risk mitigation strategies for patients being considered for EVAR.

Using machine learning to predict outcomes following suprainguinal bypass.

OBJECTIVE: Suprainguinal bypass for peripheral artery disease (PAD) carries important surgical risks; however, outcome prediction tools remain limited. We developed machine learning (ML) algorithms that predict outcomes following suprainguinal bypass. METHODS: The Vascular Quality Initiative database was used to identify patients who underwent suprainguinal bypass for PAD between 2003 and 2023. We identified 100 potential predictor variables from the index hospitalization (68 preoperative [demographic/clinical], 13 intraoperative [procedural], and 19 postoperative [in-hospital course/complications]). The primary outcomes were major adverse limb events (MALE; composite of untreated loss of patency, thrombectomy/thrombolysis, surgical revision, or major amputation) or death at 1 year following suprainguinal bypass. Our data were split into training (70%) and test (30%) sets. Using 10-fold cross-validation, we trained six ML models using preoperative features (Extreme Gradient Boosting [XGBoost], random forest, Naïve Bayes classifier, support vector machine, artificial neural network, and logistic regression). The primary model evaluation metric was area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). The best performing algorithm was further trained using intra- and postoperative data. Model robustness was evaluated using calibration plots and Brier scores. Performance was assessed on subgroups based on age, sex, race, ethnicity, rurality, median Area Deprivation Index, symptom status, procedure type, prior intervention for PAD, concurrent interventions, and urgency. RESULTS: Overall, 16,832 patients underwent suprainguinal bypass, and 3136 (18.6%) developed 1-year MALE or death. Patients with 1-year MALE or death were older (mean age, 64.9 vs 63.5 years; P < .001) with more comorbidities, had poorer functional status (65.7% vs 80.9% independent at baseline; P < .001), and were more likely to have chronic limb-threatening ischemia (67.4% vs 47.6%; P < .001) than those without an outcome. Despite being at higher cardiovascular risk, they were less likely to receive acetylsalicylic acid or statins preoperatively and at discharge. Our best performing prediction model at the preoperative stage was XGBoost, achieving an AUROC of 0.92 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.91-0.93). In comparison, logistic regression had an AUROC of 0.67 (95% CI, 0.65-0.69). Our XGBoost model maintained excellent performance at the intra- and postoperative stages, with AUROCs of 0.93 (95% CI, 0.92-0.94) and 0.98 (95% CI, 0.97-0.99), respectively. Calibration plots showed good agreement between predicted and observed event probabilities with Brier scores of 0.12 (preoperative), 0.11 (intraoperative), and 0.10 (postoperative). Of the top 10 predictors, nine were preoperative features including chronic limb-threatening ischemia, previous procedures, comorbidities, and functional status. Model performance remained robust on all subgroup analyses. CONCLUSIONS: We developed ML models that accurately predict outcomes following suprainguinal bypass, performing better than logistic regression. Our algorithms have potential for important utility in guiding perioperative risk mitigation strategies to prevent adverse outcomes following suprainguinal bypass.

Hospital learning curves for robot-assisted surgeries: a population-based analysis.

BACKGROUND: Robot-assisted surgery has been rapidly adopted. It is important to define the learning curve to inform credentialling requirements, training programs, identify fast and slow learners, and protect patients. This study aimed to characterize the hospital learning curve for common robot-assisted procedures. STUDY DESIGN: This cohort study, using administrative health data for Ontario, Canada, included adult patients who underwent a robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), total robotic hysterectomy (TRH), robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN), or robotic portal lobectomy using four arms (RPL-4) between 2010 and 2021. The association between cumulative hospital volume of a robot-assisted procedure and major complications was evaluated using multivariable logistic models adjusted for patient characteristics and clustering at the hospital level. RESULTS: A total of 6814 patients were included, with 5230, 543, 465, and 576 patients in the RARP, TRH, RAPN, and RPL-4 cohorts, respectively. There was no association between cumulative hospital volume and major complications. Visual inspection of learning curves demonstrated a transient worsening of outcomes followed by subsequent improvements with experience. Operative time decreased for all procedures with increasing volume and reached plateaus after approximately 300 RARPs, 75 TRHs, and 150 RPL-4s. The odds of a prolonged length of stay decreased with increasing volume for patients undergoing a RARP (OR 0.87; 95% CI 0.82-0.92) or RPL-4 (OR 0.77; 95% CI 0.68-0.87). CONCLUSION: Hospitals may adopt robot-assisted surgery without significantly increasing the risk of major complications for patients early in the learning curve and with an expectation of increasing efficiency.

Using Machine Learning (XGBoost) to Predict Outcomes After Infrainguinal Bypass for Peripheral Artery Disease.

OBJECTIVE: To develop machine learning (ML) algorithms that predict outcomes after infrainguinal bypass. BACKGROUND: Infrainguinal bypass for peripheral artery disease carries significant surgical risks; however, outcome prediction tools remain limited. METHODS: The Vascular Quality Initiative database was used to identify patients who underwent infrainguinal bypass for peripheral artery disease between 2003 and 2023. We identified 97 potential predictor variables from the index hospitalization [68 preoperative (demographic/clinical), 13 intraoperative (procedural), and 16 postoperative (in-hospital course/complications)]. The primary outcome was 1-year major adverse limb event (composite of surgical revision, thrombectomy/thrombolysis, or major amputation) or death. Our data were split into training (70%) and test (30%) sets. Using 10-fold cross-validation, we trained 6 ML models using preoperative features. The primary model evaluation metric was the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). The top-performing algorithm was further trained using intraoperative and postoperative features. Model robustness was evaluated using calibration plots and Brier scores. RESULTS: Overall, 59,784 patients underwent infrainguinal bypass, and 15,942 (26.7%) developed 1-year major adverse limb event/death. The best preoperative prediction model was XGBoost, achieving an AUROC (95% CI) of 0.94 (0.93-0.95). In comparison, logistic regression had an AUROC (95% CI) of 0.61 (0.59-0.63). Our XGBoost model maintained excellent performance at the intraoperative and postoperative stages, with AUROCs (95% CI's) of 0.94 (0.93-0.95) and 0.96 (0.95-0.97), respectively. Calibration plots showed good agreement between predicted and observed event probabilities with Brier scores of 0.08 (preoperative), 0.07 (intraoperative), and 0.05 (postoperative). CONCLUSIONS: ML models can accurately predict outcomes after infrainguinal bypass, outperforming logistic regression.

Predicting Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events Following Carotid Endarterectomy Using Machine Learning.

Background Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is a major vascular operation for stroke prevention that carries significant perioperative risks; however, outcome prediction tools remain limited. The authors developed machine learning algorithms to predict outcomes following CEA. Methods and Results The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program targeted vascular database was used to identify patients who underwent CEA between 2011 and 2021. Input features included 36 preoperative demographic/clinical variables. The primary outcome was 30-day major adverse cardiovascular events (composite of stroke, myocardial infarction, or death). The data were split into training (70%) and test (30%) sets. Using 10-fold cross-validation, 6 machine learning models were trained using preoperative features. The primary metric for evaluating model performance was area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. Model robustness was evaluated with calibration plot and Brier score. Overall, 38 853 patients underwent CEA during the study period. Thirty-day major adverse cardiovascular events occurred in 1683 (4.3%) patients. The best performing prediction model was XGBoost, achieving an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.91 (95% CI, 0.90-0.92). In comparison, logistic regression had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.62 (95% CI, 0.60-0.64), and existing tools in the literature demonstrate area under the receiver operating characteristic curve values ranging from 0.58 to 0.74. The calibration plot showed good agreement between predicted and observed event probabilities with a Brier score of 0.02. The strongest predictive feature in our algorithm was carotid symptom status. Conclusions The machine learning models accurately predicted 30-day outcomes following CEA using preoperative data and performed better than existing tools. They have potential for important utility in guiding risk-mitigation strategies to improve outcomes for patients being considered for CEA.

Machine learning to predict outcomes following endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

BACKGROUND: Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) carries important perioperative risks; however, there are no widely used outcome prediction tools. The aim of this study was to apply machine learning (ML) to develop automated algorithms that predict 1-year mortality following EVAR. METHODS: The Vascular Quality Initiative database was used to identify patients who underwent elective EVAR for infrarenal AAA between 2003 and 2023. Input features included 47 preoperative demographic/clinical variables. The primary outcome was 1-year all-cause mortality. Data were split into training (70 per cent) and test (30 per cent) sets. Using 10-fold cross-validation, 6 ML models were trained using preoperative features with logistic regression as the baseline comparator. The primary model evaluation metric was area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). Model robustness was evaluated with calibration plot and Brier score. RESULTS: Some 63 655 patients were included. One-year mortality occurred in 3122 (4.9 per cent) patients. The best performing prediction model for 1-year mortality was XGBoost, achieving an AUROC (95 per cent c.i.) of 0.96 (0.95-0.97). Comparatively, logistic regression had an AUROC (95 per cent c.i.) of 0.69 (0.68-0.71). The calibration plot showed good agreement between predicted and observed event probabilities with a Brier score of 0.04. The top 3 predictive features in the algorithm were 1) unfit for open AAA repair, 2) functional status, and 3) preoperative dialysis. CONCLUSIONS: In this data set, machine learning was able to predict 1-year mortality following EVAR using preoperative data and outperformed standard logistic regression models.

Using machine learning to predict outcomes following open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVE: Prediction of outcomes following open abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair remains challenging with a lack of widely used tools to guide perioperative management. We developed machine learning (ML) algorithms that predict outcomes following open AAA repair. METHODS: The Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) database was used to identify patients who underwent elective open AAA repair between 2003 and 2023. Input features included 52 preoperative demographic/clinical variables. All available preoperative variables from VQI were used to maximize predictive performance. The primary outcome was in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE; composite of myocardial infarction, stroke, or death). Secondary outcomes were individual components of the primary outcome, other in-hospital complications, and 1-year mortality and any reintervention. We split our data into training (70%) and test (30%) sets. Using 10-fold cross-validation, six ML models were trained using preoperative features (Extreme Gradient Boosting [XGBoost], random forest, Naïve Bayes classifier, support vector machine, artificial neural network, and logistic regression). The primary model evaluation metric was area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). Model robustness was evaluated with calibration plot and Brier score. The top 10 predictive features in our final model were determined based on variable importance scores. Performance was assessed on subgroups based on age, sex, race, ethnicity, rurality, median area deprivation index, proximal clamp site, prior aortic surgery, and concomitant procedures. RESULTS: Overall, 12,027 patients were included. The primary outcome of in-hospital MACE occurred in 630 patients (5.2%). Compared with patients without a primary outcome, those who developed in-hospital MACE were older with more comorbidities, demonstrated poorer functional status, had more complex aneurysms, and were more likely to require concomitant procedures. Our best performing prediction model for in-hospital MACE was XGBoost, achieving an AUROC of 0.93 (95% confidence interval, 0.92-0.94). Comparatively, logistic regression had an AUROC of 0.71 (95% confidence interval, 0.70-0.73). For secondary outcomes, XGBoost achieved AUROCs between 0.84 and 0.94. The calibration plot showed good agreement between predicted and observed event probabilities with a Brier score of 0.05. These findings highlight the excellent predictive performance of the XGBoost model. The top three predictive features in our algorithm for in-hospital MACE following open AAA repair were: (1) coronary artery disease; (2) American Society of Anesthesiologists classification; and (3) proximal clamp site. Model performance remained robust on all subgroup analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Open AAA repair outcomes can be accurately predicted using preoperative data with our ML models, which perform better than logistic regression. Our automated algorithms can help guide risk-mitigation strategies for patients being considered for open AAA repair to improve outcomes.

Outcomes Among Patients Hospitalized With Non-COVID-19 Conditions Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Alberta and Ontario, Canada.

Importance: The association of inpatient COVID-19 caseloads with outcomes in patients hospitalized with non-COVID-19 conditions is unclear. Objective: To determine whether 30-day mortality and length of stay (LOS) for patients hospitalized with non-COVID-19 medical conditions differed (1) before and during the pandemic and (2) across COVID-19 caseloads. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study compared patient hospitalizations between April 1, 2018, and September 30, 2019 (prepandemic), vs between April 1, 2020, and September 30, 2021 (during the pandemic), in 235 acute care hospitals in Alberta and Ontario, Canada. All adults hospitalized for heart failure (HF), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or asthma, urinary tract infection or urosepsis, acute coronary syndrome, or stroke were included. Exposure: The monthly surge index for each hospital from April 2020 through September 2021 was used as a measure of COVID-19 caseload relative to baseline bed capacity. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary study outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality after hospital admission for the 5 selected conditions or COVID-19 as measured by hierarchical multivariable regression models. Length of stay was the secondary outcome. Results: Between April 2018 and September 2019, 132 240 patients (mean [SD] age, 71.8 [14.8] years; 61 493 female [46.5%] and 70 747 male [53.5%]) were hospitalized for the selected medical conditions as their most responsible diagnosis compared with 115 225 (mean [SD] age, 71.9 [14.7] years, 52 058 female [45.2%] and 63 167 male [54.8%]) between April 2020 and September 2021 (114 414 [99.3%] of whom had negative SARS-CoV-2 test results). Patients admitted during the pandemic with any of the selected conditions and concomitant SARS-CoV-2 infection exhibited a much longer LOS (mean [SD], 8.6 [7.1] days or a median of 6 days longer [range, 1-22 days]) and greater mortality (varying across diagnoses, but with a mean [SD] absolute increase at 30 days of 4.7% [3.1%]) than those without coinfection. Patients hospitalized with any of the selected conditions without concomitant SARS-CoV-2 infection had similar LOSs during the pandemic as before the pandemic, and only patients with HF (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.16; 95% CI, 1.09-1.24) and COPD or asthma (AOR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.30-1.53) had a higher risk-adjusted 30-day mortality during the pandemic. As hospitals experienced COVID-19 surges, LOS and risk-adjusted mortality remained stable for patients with the selected conditions but were higher in patients with COVID-19. Once capacity reached above the 99th percentile, patients' 30-day mortality AOR was 1.80 (95% CI, 1.24-2.61) vs when the surge index was below the 75th percentile. Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study found that during surges in COVID-19 caseloads, mortality rates were significantly higher only for hospitalized patients with COVID-19. However, most patients hospitalized with non-COVID-19 conditions and negative SARS-CoV-2 test results (except those with HF or with COPD or asthma) exhibited similar risk-adjusted outcomes during the pandemic as before the pandemic, even during COVID-19 caseload surges, suggesting resiliency in the event of regional or hospital-specific occupancy strains.

Collaboration and Partnership in a 5-Level Engagement Framework for Diabetic Foot Ulcer Management: A Patient-oriented Scoping Review.

OBJECTIVE: The management of diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) is complex, and patient engagement is essential for DFU healing, but it often comes down to the patient's consultation. Therefore, we sought to document patients' engagement in terms of collaboration and partnership for DFUs in 5 levels (direct care, organizational, policy level, research, and education), as well as strategies for patient engagement using an adapted engagement framework. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review of the literature from inception to April 2022 using the Joanna Briggs Institute method and a patient-oriented approach. We also consulted DFU stakeholders to obtain feedback on the findings. The data were extracted using PROGRESS+ factors for an equity lens. The effects of engagement were described using Bodenheimer's quadruple aims for value-based care. RESULTS: Of 4,211 potentially eligible records, 15 studies met our eligibility criteria, including 214 patients involved in engagement initiatives. Most studies were recent (9 of 15 since 2020) and involved patient engagement at the direct medical care level (8 of 15). Self-management (7 of 15) was the principal way to clinically engage the patients. None of the studies sought to define the direct influence of patient engagement on health outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Very few studies described patients' characteristics. Engaged patients were typically men from high-income countries, in their 50s, with poorly managed type 2 diabetes. We found little rigorous research of patient engagement at all levels for DFUs. There is an urgent need to improve the reporting of research in this area and to engage a diversity of patients.