Reffal Aldainiy

Dr. Reffal Aldainiy

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

2Years (2025-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
16 April 2026 in Cancers
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
HAHadi A. Al-Hakami
Hadi A. Al-Hakami
IAIsmail A. Abdullah
Ismail A. Abdullah
NANora Almutairi
Nora Almutairi
RARimaz Rashed Aldawsari
Rimaz Rashed Aldawsari
GAGhadah Ali Alluqmani
Ghadah Ali Alluqmani
RAReffal Aldainiy
Reffal Aldainiy
Background: Laryngeal cancer (LC), a common subtype of head and neck cancers (HNC), is most frequently represented by laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma (LSCC). Prognosis largely depends on early detection; however, traditional prognostic tools, including tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) staging, often show limited predictive accuracy. Artificial intelligence (AI), including machine learning (ML), natural language processing, and deep learning (DL), has emerged as a promising approach to improving cancer diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment planning by analyzing clinical data and medical imaging. Objective: This systematic review assesses the role of AI in prognosis, recurrence prediction, and treatment outcomes in LC. Methods: PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, IEEE Xplore, and ScienceDirect were searched up to January 2025. A total of 1062 records were identified; after title/abstract screening and full-text assessment, 29 studies were included. Eligible studies involved adult patients with LC and applied AI to diagnose, prognose, predict recurrence, or assess treatment outcomes using human datasets. Study quality and risk of bias were evaluated using the QUADAS-2 and QUIPS. Results: The 29 included studies were mostly retrospective, with sample sizes ranging from 10 to 63,000 patients. Most focused on LSCC, with a higher prevalence in males. The studies utilized various AI techniques, including deep learning models such as convolutional neural networks (CNNs) and DeepSurv, as well as ML algorithms like random survival forest, gradient boosting machines, random forest, k-nearest neighbors, naïve Bayes, and decision trees. AI models demonstrated strong prognostic performance, surpassing Cox regression and TNM staging in predicting survival and recurrence. Several studies reported outcomes related to treatment, such as chemotherapy response, occult lymph node metastasis, and the need for salvage surgery. Methodological quality varied, with biases related to patient selection and confounding factors. Conclusions: AI has the potential to improve prognosis estimation, recurrence prediction, and treatment outcome assessment in LC. However, although AI can be a helpful addition to clinical decision-making, more prospective studies, external validation, and standardized evaluation are necessary before these technologies can be confidently adopted in everyday clinical practice.

1 January 2025 in International Journal of Endocrinology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
HAHanan Aljedani
Hanan Aljedani
JMJomanah Mazi
Jomanah Mazi
AAArwa Almutairi
Arwa Almutairi
HNHalah Namnkani
Halah Namnkani
RAReffal Aldainiy
Reffal Aldainiy
AAAlaa Althubaiti
Alaa Althubaiti
Background: Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a growing concern globally. DM control is indicated by hemoglobin A1c, measuring glucose levels within two to 3 months. Patients with DM who have surgery may experience postoperative hyperglycemia (POHG) which is associated with many complications. This study aimed to investigate POHG incidence among patients with DM based on their level of glycemic control. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients with DM ≥ 18 years who had orthopedic, intra‐abdominal, cardiothoracic, or vascular surgery at King Abdulaziz Medical City, Jeddah, between October 2016 and October 2023. Patients with DM were considered controlled if the hemoglobin A1c was < 7%. Results: The study included 306 patients, and the majority (69.28%) experienced POHG. There was a significant association between POHG and the level of glycemic control. POHG was experienced by 32.55% of patients with controlled DM vs 67.45% of patients with uncontrolled DM. Furthermore, patients with preoperative random glucose readings (RBG) of ≥ 9.2 mmol/L had a significantly higher risk of developing POHG. Moreover, older age and male sex were associated with higher POHG risk. Conclusion: Our data indicate that the incidence of POHG was significantly greater among patients with uncontrolled DM. Patients with DM with a preoperative RBG of ≥ 9.2 mmol/L had a higher likelihood of developing POHG. Future research should include a larger sample and investigate associations between POHG, other complications, and the influence of varying levels of DM control.