Prediction of persistent post-surgery pain by preoperative cold pain sensitivity: Biomarker development with machine-learning-derived analysis

34Citations
Citations of this article
98Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background To prevent persistent post-surgery pain, early identification of patients at high risk is a clinical need. Supervised machine-learning techniques were used to test how accurately the patients' performance in a preoperatively performed tonic cold pain test could predict persistent post-surgery pain. Methods We analysed 763 patients from a cohort of 900 women who were treated for breast cancer, of whom 61 patients had developed signs of persistent pain during three yr of follow-up. Preoperatively, all patients underwent a cold pain test (immersion of the hand into a water bath at 2-4 °C). The patients rated the pain intensity using a numerical ratings scale (NRS) from 0 to 10. Supervised machine-learning techniques were used to construct a classifier that could predict patients at risk of persistent pain. Results Whether or not a patient rated the pain intensity at NRS=10 within less than 45 s during the cold water immersion test provided a negative predictive value of 94.4% to assign a patient to the "persistent pain" group. If NRS=10 was never reached during the cold test, the predictive value for not developing persistent pain was almost 97%. However, a low negative predictive value of 10% implied a high false positive rate. Conclusions Results provide a robust exclusion of persistent pain in women with an accuracy of 94.4%. Moreover, results provide further support for the hypothesis that the endogenous pain inhibitory system may play an important role in the process of pain becoming persistent.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Lötsch, J., Ultsch, A., & Kalso, E. (2017). Prediction of persistent post-surgery pain by preoperative cold pain sensitivity: Biomarker development with machine-learning-derived analysis. British Journal of Anaesthesia, 119(4), 821–829. https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/aex236

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free