A Machine Learning Model for the Accurate Prediction of 1-Year Survival in TAVI Patients: A Retrospective Observational Cohort Study.
TAVI
machine learning
outcome
personalized
prediction
survival
Journal
Journal of clinical medicine
ISSN: 2077-0383
Titre abrégé: J Clin Med
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101606588
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
24 Aug 2023
24 Aug 2023
Historique:
received:
11
07
2023
revised:
17
08
2023
accepted:
22
08
2023
medline:
9
9
2023
pubmed:
9
9
2023
entrez:
9
9
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
predicting the 1-year survival of patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is indispensable for managing safe early discharge strategies and resource optimization. Routinely acquired data (134 variables) were used from 629 patients, who underwent transfemoral TAVI from 2012 up to 2018. Support vector machines, neuronal networks, random forests, nearest neighbour and Bayes models were used with new, previously unseen patients to predict 1-year mortality in TAVI patients. A genetic variable selection algorithm identified a set of predictor variables with high predictive power. Univariate analyses revealed 19 variables (clinical, laboratory, echocardiographic, computed tomographic and ECG) that significantly influence 1-year survival. Before applying the reject option, the model performances in terms of negative predictive value (NPV) and positive predictive value (PPV) were similar between all models. After applying the reject option, the random forest model identified a subcohort showing a negative predictive value of 96% (positive predictive value = 92%, accuracy = 96%). Our model can predict the 1-year survival with very high negative and sufficiently high positive predictive value, with very high accuracy. The "reject option" allows a high performance and harmonic integration of machine learning in the clinical decision process.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
predicting the 1-year survival of patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is indispensable for managing safe early discharge strategies and resource optimization.
METHODS
METHODS
Routinely acquired data (134 variables) were used from 629 patients, who underwent transfemoral TAVI from 2012 up to 2018. Support vector machines, neuronal networks, random forests, nearest neighbour and Bayes models were used with new, previously unseen patients to predict 1-year mortality in TAVI patients. A genetic variable selection algorithm identified a set of predictor variables with high predictive power.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Univariate analyses revealed 19 variables (clinical, laboratory, echocardiographic, computed tomographic and ECG) that significantly influence 1-year survival. Before applying the reject option, the model performances in terms of negative predictive value (NPV) and positive predictive value (PPV) were similar between all models. After applying the reject option, the random forest model identified a subcohort showing a negative predictive value of 96% (positive predictive value = 92%, accuracy = 96%).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Our model can predict the 1-year survival with very high negative and sufficiently high positive predictive value, with very high accuracy. The "reject option" allows a high performance and harmonic integration of machine learning in the clinical decision process.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37685547
pii: jcm12175481
doi: 10.3390/jcm12175481
pmc: PMC10488486
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Références
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019 Jul 22;12(14):1328-1338
pubmed: 31320027
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2012 Apr;41(4):734-44; discussion 744-5
pubmed: 22378855
N Engl J Med. 2016 Apr 28;374(17):1609-20
pubmed: 27040324
Eur Heart J. 2019 Jul 14;40(27):2218-2227
pubmed: 31505615
Am J Cardiol. 2022 Aug 1;176:112-117
pubmed: 35644697
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2019 Apr;157(4):1406-1415.e3
pubmed: 30482527
Lancet. 2007 Oct 20;370(9596):1453-7
pubmed: 18064739
Clin Res Cardiol. 2021 Mar;110(3):343-356
pubmed: 32583062
Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2016 Apr;9(4):e002944
pubmed: 27076570
N Engl J Med. 2023 Jun 1;388(22):2037-2048
pubmed: 36876756
J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2020 Jul - Aug;14(4):307-313
pubmed: 31874792
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2019 Sep 1;56(3):488-494
pubmed: 31321408
Europace. 2019 May 1;21(5):787-795
pubmed: 30629159
Eur Heart J. 2019 Oct 7;40(38):3143-3153
pubmed: 31329852
Eur Heart J. 2012 Oct;33(19):2403-18
pubmed: 23026477
Eur Heart J. 2017 Sep 21;38(36):2739-2791
pubmed: 28886619
Intensive Care Med. 2017 Nov;43(11):1551-1561
pubmed: 28110412
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2022 Mar 28;15(6):575-589
pubmed: 35331449
J Am Heart Assoc. 2020 Aug 4;9(15):e016990
pubmed: 32715844
EuroIntervention. 2023 Aug 07;19(5):e442-e449
pubmed: 37128805
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2020 Nov;160(5):1235-1246.e2
pubmed: 31757451
ESC Heart Fail. 2022 Dec;9(6):3858-3867
pubmed: 35916354
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2014 Aug;7(8):898-904
pubmed: 25086843
Eur Heart J. 2022 Feb 12;43(7):561-632
pubmed: 34453165
EuroIntervention. 2020 Aug 07;16(6):e494-e501
pubmed: 32091404
Int J Cardiol. 2023 Jan 1;370:279-286
pubmed: 36216094