TRV-2026-1469Version 1 · Certified

Written 2026-10-15 18:13:48 UTC · current record

Reason for this version

Certified into the record

Canonical text (the exact bytes fingerprinted)

TRUVACE RECORD VERSION
record: TRV-2026-1469
version: 1
kind: certified
reason: Certified into the record
timestamp: 2026-10-15T18:13:48.365250Z
status: published
lens: g_space
sector: health
headline: A Predictive Model Integrating Coagulation Profiles for Preoperative Risk Stratification of Difficult Single-Incision Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Retrospective Cohort Study Based on Explainable Machine Learning
dek: Background Accurate preoperative prediction of surgical difficulty in single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) remains challenging, as models for multiport surgery are not directly applicable. Methods This retrospective single-center study included 520 patients, who were randomly divided into a training cohort (n=364) and an internal validation cohort (n=156). Six predictors were identified, guiding 8 machine learning models. Performance was assessed using the area under the curve (AUC), calibration,…
gain_title: A neural network built on six predictors including coagulation parameters discriminated difficult from non-difficult single-incision cholecystectomy cases in internal validation, potentially aiding patient selection and surgical planning.
problem_title: (none)
trace_subject: (none)
gain_reading: A neural network built on six predictors including coagulation parameters discriminated difficult from non-difficult single-incision cholecystectomy cases in internal validation, potentially aiding patient selection and surgical planning.
gain_evidence: may support preoperative risk stratification, patient selection, and individualized surgical planning
problem_reading: (none)
problem_evidence: (none)
quick_read: Researchers built and tested machine learning models to predict which patients would be harder to operate on with single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy, since prediction tools designed for multiport surgery do not transfer directly. They used a retrospective single-center cohort of 520 patients split into training and internal validation groups.

The work matters because surgeons could use an interpretable, openly available calculator to anticipate difficulty before operating. The evidence is retrospective and from one center with only internal validation, so performance in other hospitals and in routine practice is not yet shown.
limitation: The study is a retrospective, single-center analysis validated on an internal cohort drawn from the same population, so generalizability to other settings is untested.
tag: Evidence-backed gain
key_points: The study included 520 patients, divided into a training cohort of 364 and an internal validation cohort of 156. | Six predictors guided eight machine learning models, and a neural network performed best with an AUC of 0.867. | Excluding coagulation parameters lowered the AUC by 0.043, suggesting they add predictive value. | A sensitivity analysis using a hard-event endpoint gave an AUC of 0.877, and the model is available as an online calculator.
rundown: The authors addressed the gap that preoperative difficulty prediction models for multiport laparoscopic surgery are not directly applicable to the single-incision approach. They selected six predictors and trained eight machine learning models on the training cohort.

Performance was judged with AUC, calibration, decision curve analysis, and classification metrics. The best neural network reached accuracy of 0.833, specificity of 0.941, NPV of 0.855, and a Brier score of 0.118, with net benefit across clinical thresholds.

The model was interpreted with SHapley Additive exPlanations and deployed as a public online calculator. Ablation and correlation analyses indicated coagulation parameters provide complementary predictive value.
sources:
- peer_reviewed | Surgical Laparoscopy, Endoscopy & Percutaneous Techniques | https://doi.org/10.1097/sle.0000000000001514 | 2026-10-01
prev: 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
sha256
fb147166465ff8068ad96c553312601ec30eedee866fc012e317965d4a719651
previous
0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
Verify this record
How to verify without trusting this page

Fetch the canonical text of any version from /api/record/TRV-2026-1469 and hash it yourself — for example shasum -a 256 on the saved canonical field. The result must equal content_hash, and each version’s text ends with prev:followed by the prior version’s hash (version 1 chains to 64 zeros). If a single character of any version had been altered since certification, the chain would not reproduce.