In recent years, machine learning (ML) and artificial neural networks (ANNs), a particular subset of ML, have been adopted by various areas of healthcare. A number of diagnostic and prognostic algorithms have been designed and implemented across a range of orthopaedic sub-specialties to date, with many positive results. However, the methodology of many of these studies is flawed, and few compare the use of ML with the current approach in clinical practice. Spinal surgery has advanced rapidly over the past three decades, particularly in the areas of implant technology, advanced surgical techniques, biologics, and enhanced recovery protocols. It is therefore regarded an innovative field. Inevitably, spinal surgeons will wish to incorporate ML into their practice should models prove effective in diagnostic or prognostic terms. The purpose of this article is to review published studies that describe the application of neural networks to spinal surgery and which actively compare ANN models to contemporary clinical standards allowing evaluation of their efficacy, accuracy, and relatability. It also explores some of the limitations of the technology, which act to constrain the widespread adoption of neural networks for diagnostic and prognostic use in spinal care. Finally, it describes the necessary considerations should institutions wish to incorporate ANNs into their practices. In doing so, the aim of this review is to provide a practical approach for spinal surgeons to understand the relevant aspects of neural networks. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(9):1442–1448.

Background Many surgeons routinely place intraperitoneal drains after elective colorectal surgery. However, enhanced recovery after surgery guidelines recommend against their routine use owing to a lack of clear clinical benefit. This study aimed to describe international variation in intraperitoneal drain placement and the safety of this practice. Methods COMPASS (COMPlicAted intra-abdominal collectionS after colorectal Surgery) was a prospective, international, cohort study which enrolled consecutive adults undergoing elective colorectal surgery (February to March 2020). The primary outcome was the rate of intraperitoneal drain placement. Secondary outcomes included: rate and time to diagnosis of postoperative intraperitoneal collections; rate of surgical site infections (SSIs); time to discharge; and 30-day major postoperative complications (Clavien–Dindo grade at least III). After propensity score matching, multivariable logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards regression were used to estimate the independent association of the secondary outcomes with drain placement. Results Overall, 1805 patients from 22 countries were included (798 women, 44.2 per cent; median age 67.0 years). The drain insertion rate was 51.9 per cent (937 patients). After matching, drains were not associated with reduced rates (odds ratio (OR) 1.33, 95 per cent c.i. 0.79 to 2.23; P = 0.287) or earlier detection (hazard ratio (HR) 0.87, 0.33 to 2.31; P = 0.780) of collections. Although not associated with worse major postoperative complications (OR 1.09, 0.68 to 1.75; P = 0.709), drains were associated with delayed hospital discharge (HR 0.58, 0.52 to 0.66; P < 0.001) and an increased risk of SSIs (OR 2.47, 1.50 to 4.05; P < 0.001). Conclusion Intraperitoneal drain placement after elective colorectal surgery is not associated with earlier detection of postoperative collections, but prolongs hospital stay and increases SSI risk.

No abstract

No abstract

Study design Systematic Review Objectives Vertebral Artery Injury (VAI) is a potentially serious complication of cervical spine fractures. As many patients can be asymptomatic at the time of injury, the identification and diagnosis of VAI can often prove difficult. Due to the high rates of morbidity and mortality associated with VAI, high clinical suspicion is paramount. The purpose of this review is to elucidate incidence, diagnosis, treatment and outcomes of VAI associated with cervical spine injuries. Methods A systematic search of electronic databases was performed using ‘PUBMED’, ‘EMBASE’,‘Medline (OVID)’, and ‘Web of Science, for articles pertaining to traumatic cervical fractures with associated VAI. Results 24 studies were included in this systematic review. Data was included from 48 744 patients. In regards to the demographics of the focus groups that highlighted information on VAI, the mean average age was 46.6 (32.1-62.6). 75.1% (169/225) were male and 24.9% (56/225) were female. Overall incidence of VAI was 596/11 479 (5.19%). 190/420 (45.2%) of patients with VAI had fractures involving the transverse foramina. The right vertebral artery was the most commonly injured 114/234 (48.7%). V3 was the most common section injured (16/36 (44.4%)). Grade I was the most common (103/218 (47.2%)) injury noted. Collective acute hospital mortality rate was 32/226 (14.2%), ranging from 0-26.2% across studies. Conclusion VAI secondary to cervical spine trauma has a notable incidence and high associated mortality rates. The current available literature is limited by a low quality of evidence. In order to optimise diagnostic protocols and treatment strategies, in addition to reducing mortality rates associated with VAI, robust quantitative and qualitative studies are needed.