Predicting Outcomes Following Carotid Artery Stenting Using Machine Learning
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Carotid artery stenting (CAS) carries important perioperative risks. Outcome prediction tools may help guide clinical decision-making but remain limited. We developed machine learning (ML) algorithms that predict 30-day outcomes following transfemoral CAS. METHODS: The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) targeted vascular database was used to identify patients who underwent transfemoral CAS between 2011 and 2021. Input features included 36 preoperative demographic/clinical variables. The primary outcome was a 30-day major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE; composite of stroke, myocardial infarction [MI], or death). The secondary outcomes were 30-day stroke, MI, death, carotid-related morbidity, other morbidity, non-home discharge, and unplanned readmission. Our data were split into training (70%) and test (30%) sets. Using 10-fold cross-validation, we trained six ML models using preoperative features with logistic regression as the baseline comparator. The primary model evaluation metric was area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). Model robustness was evaluated with calibration plot and Brier score. Variable importance scores were calculated to determine the top 10 predictive features. Performance was assessed on subgroups based on age, sex, race, ethnicity, symptom status, stent type, and urgency. RESULTS: Overall, 2093 patients underwent CAS during the study period. Thirty-day MACE occurred in 130 (6.2%) patients. The best-performing prediction model for 30-day MACE was XGBoost, achieving an AUROC (95% CI) of 0.93 (0.92-0.94). In comparison, logistic regression had an AUROC (95% CI) of 0.67 (0.65-0.68), and existing tools in the literature demonstrate AUROCs ranging from 0.58 to 0.74. For secondary outcomes, XGBoost achieved AUROCs between 0.86 and 0.97. The calibration plot showed good agreement between predicted and observed event probabilities with a Brier score of 0.02. The top three predictive features in our algorithm were (1) symptomatic carotid stenosis, (2) age, and (3) American Society of Anesthesiologists classification. Model performance remained robust on all subgroup analyses of specific demographic and clinical populations. CONCLUSIONS: Our ML models accurately predict 30-day outcomes following transfemoral CAS using preoperative data. They have the potential for important utility in guiding risk-mitigation strategies for patients being considered for CAS to improve outcomes.Clinical ImpactTransfemoral carotid artery stenting (CAS) carries important perioperative risks. Outcome prediction tools may help guide clinical decision-making but remain limited. Using data from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) targeted vascular database, we developed machine learning (ML) models that accurately predict 30-day outcomes following transfemoral CAS using preoperative data, outperforming logistic regression and existing tools in the literature. The models were well-calibrated and remained robust across demographic and clinical subpopulations. These ML algorithms have the potential for important utility in guiding risk-mitigation strategies for patients being considered for transfemoral CAS to improve outcomes.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».