RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Potential of machine learning to predict early ischemic events after carotid endarterectomy or stenting: A comparison with surgeon predictions
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2020.11.16.20231639
DO 10.1101/2020.11.16.20231639
A1 Kazuya Matsuo
A1 Atsushi Fujita
A1 Kohkichi Hosoda
A1 Jun Tanaka
A1 Taichiro Imahori
A1 Taiji Ishii
A1 Masaaki Kohta
A1 Kazuhiro Tanaka
A1 Yoichi Uozumi
A1 Hidehito Kimura
A1 Takashi Sasayama
A1 Eiji Kohmura
YR 2020
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/11/26/2020.11.16.20231639.abstract
AB Objective Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) are recommended for high stroke-risk patients with carotid artery stenosis to reduce ischemic events. However, we often face difficulty in determining the best treatment method. Therefore, it is necessary to develop a useful decision support tool to identify an appropriate patient-specific treatment for carotid artery stenosis. Our objective is to develop an accurate post-CEA/CAS outcome prediction model using machine learning (ML) algorithms that will serve as a basis for a new decision support tool for patient-specific treatment planning.Methods Retrospectively collected data from 165 consecutive patients with carotid artery stenosis underwent CEA or CAS at a single institution were divided into training and test samples. The following six ML algorithms were tuned, and their predictive performance evaluated by comparison with surgeon predictions: an artificial neural network, logistic regression, support vector machine, Gaussian naïve Bayes, random forest, and extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost). A total of 17 clinical parameters were used for the ML model development. These parameters consisted of age, pretreatment modified Rankin scale, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, medical history of arteriosclerotic disease, serum low-density lipoprotein cholesterol value, internal carotid artery peak systolic velocity, symptomatic, crescendo transient ischemic attack or stroke in evolution, previous neck irradiation, type III aorta, contralateral carotid occlusion, stenosis at a high position, mobile plaque, plaque ulceration, vulnerable plaque, and procedure (CEA or CAS). Outcome was defined as any ischemic stroke within 30 days after treatment.Results The XGBoost model performed the best in the evaluation; its sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and accuracy were 66.7%, 89.5%, 50.0%, and 86.4%, respectively. The average of the outcome predictions made by four surgeons had a sensitivity of 41.7%, specificity of 75.0%, positive predictive value of 20.1%, and accuracy of 70.5%. Internal carotid artery peak systolic velocity, serum low density lipoprotein cholesterol, and procedure (CEA or CAS) were the most contributing factors according to the XGBoost algorithm.Conclusions We were able to develop a post-CEA/CAS outcome prediction model comparable to surgeons in performance. The accurate outcome prediction model will make it possible to make a more appropriate patient-specific selection of CEA or CAS for the treatment of carotid artery stenosis.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis study was partially supported by research funds from the Alumni Association of the Department of Neurosurgery, Kobe University School of Medicine.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The Ethical Committee of Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine (approval no. B200444).All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesThe patient data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. A subset of the program code generated for this study is available at GitHub. https://gist.github.com/kkmatsuo/54baea963568d184f347400a486eba45 AIartificial intelligenceANNartificial neural networkCAScarotid artery stentingCEAcarotid endarterectomyDWIdiffusion weighted imagingEEGelectroencephalogramGBDTgradient boosting decision treeICA-PSVinternal carotid artery peak systolic velocitykNNk-nearest-neighboursLDLlow-density lipoproteinMLmachine learningmRSmodified Rankin scalePPVpositive prediction valueROC-AUCreceiver operating characteristic curverSO2regional cerebral oximetrySSEPsomatosensory evoked potentialsSVMsupport vector machineTIAtransient ischemic attackXGBoostextreme gradient boosting