REFERENCES
1. Versteijne E, van Dam JL, Suker M, et al. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus upfront surgery for resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: long-term results of the dutch randomized PREOPANC trial. J Clin Oncol 2022;40:1220-30.
2. van der Gaag NA, Rauws EA, van Eijck CH, et al. Preoperative biliary drainage for cancer of the head of the pancreas. N Engl J Med 2010;362:129-37.
3. Hackert T, Hinz U, Fritz S, et al. Enucleation in pancreatic surgery: indications, technique, and outcome compared to standard pancreatic resections. Langenbecks Arch Surg 2011;396:1197-203.
4. Graaf W, van Lienden KP, van den Esschert JW, Bennink RJ, van Gulik TM. Increase in future remnant liver function after preoperative portal vein embolization. Br J Surg 2011;98:825-34.
5. Guglielmi A, Ruzzenente A, Conci S, Valdegamberi A, Iacono C. How much remnant is enough in liver resection? Dig Surg 2012;29:6-17.
6. Cercek A, Boerner T, Tan BR, et al. Assessment of hepatic arterial infusion of floxuridine in combination with systemic gemcitabine and oxaliplatin in patients with unresectable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: a phase 2 clinical trial. JAMA Oncol 2020;6:60-7.
7. Xu Q, Kobayashi S, Ye X, Meng X. Comparison of hepatic resection and radiofrequency ablation for small hepatocellular carcinoma: a meta-analysis of 16,103 patients. Sci Rep 2014;4:7252.
8. Konstantinou I, Shapey IM, Papamichael D, de Liguori Carino N. Outcomes following potentially curative therapies for older patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 2021;47:591-6.
9. Pencina MJ, D'Agostino RB Sr, Steyerberg EW. Extensions of net reclassification improvement calculations to measure usefulness of new biomarkers. Stat Med 2011;30:11-21.
10. Bakhtiarvand N, Khashei M, Mahnam M, Hajiahmadi S. A novel reliability-based regression model to analyze and forecast the severity of COVID-19 patients. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2022;22:123.
11. Klein G, Phillips JK, Rall EL, Peluso DA. A data-frame theory of sensemaking. In Hoffman RR, editor. Expertise out of context. Psychology Press; 2007. pp. 118-160.
12. Klein GA. A recognition-primed decision (RPD) model of rapid decision making. In Klein GA, Orasanu J, Calderwood R, Zsambok CE, editors. Decision making in action: models and methods. Ablex Publishing; 1993. pp. 138-47. Available from: https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1993-97634-006 [Last accessed on 11 Jan 2023].
13. Klein G, Calderwood R, Macgregor D. Critical decision method for eliciting knowledge. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 1989;19:462-72.
14. Smits FJ, Henry AC, Besselink MG, et al. Algorithm-based care versus usual care for the early recognition and management of complications after pancreatic resection in the Netherlands: an open-label, nationwide, stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial. Lancet 2022;399:1867-75.
15. Subbe CP, Kruger M, Rutherford P, Gemmel L. Validation of a modified Early Warning Score in medical admissions. QJM-INT J MED 2001;94:521-6.
16. Gardner-Thorpe J, Love N, Wrightson J, Walsh S, Keeling N. The value of modified early warning score (MEWS) in surgical in-patients: a prospective observational study. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2006;88:571-5.
17. Nishijima I, Oyadomari S, Maedomari S, et al. Use of a modified early warning score system to reduce the rate of in-hospital cardiac arrest. J Intensive Care 2016;4:12.
18. Beckett DJ, Inglis M, Oswald S, et al. Reducing cardiac arrests in the acute admissions unit: a quality improvement journey. BMJ Qual Saf 2013;22:1025-31.
19. Kwon JM, Lee Y, Lee Y, Lee S, Park J. An algorithm based on deep learning for predicting in-hospital cardiac arrest. J Am Heart Assoc 2018:7.
20. Varley PR, Geller DA, Tsung A. Factors influencing failure to rescue after pancreaticoduodenectomy: a National Surgical Quality Improvement Project Perspective. J Surg Res 2017;214:131-9.
21. O'Reilly D, Edmiston R, Bijoor P, et al. Early experience with a hepatobiliary and pancreatic quality improvement program. BMJ Qual Improv Rep 2014;2:u201158.w721.
22. Koch M, Garden OJ, Padbury R, et al. Bile leakage after hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgery: a definition and grading of severity by the International Study Group of Liver Surgery. Surgery 2011;149:680-8.
23. Rahbari NN, Garden OJ, Padbury R, et al. Posthepatectomy liver failure: a definition and grading by the International Study Group of Liver Surgery (ISGLS). Surgery 2011;149:713-24.
24. Rahbari NN, Garden OJ, Padbury R, et al. Post-hepatectomy haemorrhage: a definition and grading by the International Study Group of Liver Surgery (ISGLS). HPB 2011;13:528-35.
25. Bassi C, Marchegiani G, Dervenis C, et al. The 2016 update of the International Study Group (ISGPS) definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula: 11 years after. Surgery 2017;161:584-91.
26. Wente MN, Bassi C, Dervenis C, et al. Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) after pancreatic surgery: a suggested definition by the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS). Surgery 2007;142:761-8.
27. Wente MN, Veit JA, Bassi C, et al. Postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH): an International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) definition. Surgery 2007;142:20-5.
28. Slankamenac K, Graf R, Barkun J, Puhan MA, Clavien PA. The comprehensive complication index: a novel continuous scale to measure surgical morbidity. Ann Surg 2013;258:1-7.
29. van der Werf LR, Kok NFM, Buis CI, et al. Implementation and first results of a mandatory, nationwide audit on liver surgery. HPB 2019;21:1400-10.
30. Suurmeijer JA, Henry AC, Bonsing BA, et al. Outcome of pancreatic surgery during the first six years of a mandatory audit within the Dutch pancreatic cancer group. Ann Surg 2022;Online ahead of print.
31. Madani A, Namazi B, Altieri MS, et al. Artificial intelligence for intraoperative guidance: using semantic segmentation to identify surgical anatomy during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Ann Surg 2022;276:363-9.
32. Callery MP, Pratt WB, Kent TS, Chaikof EL, Vollmer CM Jr. A prospectively validated clinical risk score accurately predicts pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy. J Am Coll Surg 2013;216:1-14.
33. Mungroop TH, van Rijssen LB, van Klaveren D, et al. Alternative fistula risk score for pancreatoduodenectomy (a-FRS): design and international external validation. Ann Surg 2019;269:937-43.
34. Roberts KJ, Sutcliffe RP, Marudanayagam R, et al. Scoring system to predict pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy: a UK multicenter study. Ann Surg 2015;261:1191-7.
35. Shi Y, Gao F, Qi Y, et al. Computed tomography-adjusted fistula risk score for predicting clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy: training and external validation of model upgrade. EBioMedicine 2020;62:103096.
36. Tang B, Lin Z, Ma Y, et al. A modified alternative fistula risk score (a-FRS) obtained from the computed tomography enhancement pattern of the pancreatic parenchyma predicts pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy. HPB 2021;23:1759-66.
37. Hayashi H, Amaya K, Fujiwara Y, et al. Comparison of three fistula risk scores after pancreatoduodenectomy: A single-institution retrospective study. Asian J Surg 2021;44:143-6.
38. Kambakamba P, Mannil M, Herrera PE, et al. The potential of machine learning to predict postoperative pancreatic fistula based on preoperative, non-contrast-enhanced CT: a proof-of-principle study. Surgery 2020;167:448-54.
39. Capretti G, Bonifacio C, De Palma C, et al. A machine learning risk model based on preoperative computed tomography scan to predict postoperative outcomes after pancreatoduodenectomy. Updates Surg 2022;74:235-43.
40. Gichoya JW, Banerjee I, Bhimireddy AR, et al. AI recognition of patient race in medical imaging: a modelling study. Lancet Digit Health 2022;4:e406-14.
41. Mu W, Liu C, Gao F, et al. Prediction of clinically relevant pancreatico-enteric anastomotic fistulas after pancreatoduodenectomy using deep learning of preoperative computed tomography. Theranostics 2020;10:9779-88.
42. Chen S, Li J, Wang D, Fung H, Wong L, Zhao L. The hepatitis B epidemic in China should receive more attention. Lancet 2018;391:1572.
43. Sidey-Gibbons JAM, Sidey-Gibbons CJ. Machine learning in medicine: a practical introduction. BMC Med Res Methodol 2019;19:64.
44. Han IW, Cho K, Ryu Y, et al. Risk prediction platform for pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy using artificial intelligence. World J Gastroenterol 2020;26:4453-64.
45. Cos H, Li D, Williams G, et al. Predicting outcomes in patients undergoing pancreatectomy using wearable technology and machine learning: prospective cohort study. J Med Internet Res 2021;23:e23595.
46. Shi HY, Lee KT, Wang JJ, Sun DP, Lee HH, Chiu CC. Artificial neural network model for predicting 5-year mortality after surgery for hepatocellular carcinoma: a nationwide study. J Gastrointest Surg 2012;16:2126-31.
47. Qiao G, Li J, Huang A, Yan Z, Lau WY, Shen F. Artificial neural networking model for the prediction of post-hepatectomy survival of patients with early hepatocellular carcinoma. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2014;29:2014-20.
48. Wang F, Kaushal R, Khullar D. Should health care demand interpretable artificial intelligence or accept “black box” medicine? Ann Intern Med 2020;172:59-60.
49. Huang Y, Chen H, Zeng Y, Liu Z, Ma H, Liu J. Development and validation of a machine learning prognostic model for hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence after surgical resection. Front Oncol 2020;10:593741.
50. Mai R, Lu H, Bai T, et al. Artificial neural network model for preoperative prediction of severe liver failure after hemihepatectomy in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Surgery 2020;168:643-52.
51. Shapey IM, Malik HZ, de Liguori Carino N. Data driven decision-making for older patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Eur J Surg Oncol 2021;47:576-82.
52. Collins GS, Moons KGM. Reporting of artificial intelligence prediction models. Lancet 2019;393:1577-9.
53. Shen Z, Chen H, Wang W, et al. Machine learning algorithms as early diagnostic tools for pancreatic fistula following pancreaticoduodenectomy and guide drain removal: A retrospective cohort study. Int J Surg 2022;102:106638.
