Cargando…

Supplementing Existing Societal Risk Models for Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement With Machine Learning for Improved Prediction

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the role of supplementing Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) risk models for surgical aortic valve replacement with machine learning (ML). METHODS AND RESULTS: Adults undergoing isolated surgical aortic valve replacement in the STS National Database between 2007 and...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kilic, Arman, Habib, Robert H., Miller, James K., Shahian, David M., Dearani, Joseph A., Dubrawski, Artur W.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8751954/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34658259
http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.120.019697
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the role of supplementing Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) risk models for surgical aortic valve replacement with machine learning (ML). METHODS AND RESULTS: Adults undergoing isolated surgical aortic valve replacement in the STS National Database between 2007 and 2017 were included. ML models for operative mortality and major morbidity were previously developed using extreme gradient boosting. Concordance and discordance in predicted risk between ML and STS models were defined using equal‐size tertile‐based thresholds of risk. Calibration metrics and discriminatory capability were compared between concordant and discordant patients. A total of 243 142 patients were included. Nearly all calibration metrics were improved in cases of concordance. Similarly, concordance indices improved substantially in cases of concordance for all models with the exception of deep sternal wound infection. The greatest improvements in concordant versus discordant cases were in renal failure: ML model (concordance index, 0.660 [95% CI, 0.632–0.687] discordant versus 0.808 [95% CI, 0.794–0.822] concordant) and STS model (concordance index, 0.573 [95% CI, 0.549–0.576] discordant versus 0.797 [95% CI, 0.782–0.811] concordant) (each P<0.001). Excluding deep sternal wound infection, the concordance indices ranged from 0.549 to 0.660 for discordant cases and 0.674 to 0.808 for concordant cases. CONCLUSIONS: Supplementing ML models with existing STS models for surgical aortic valve replacement may have an important role in risk prediction and should be explored further. In particular, for the roughly 25% to 50% of patients demonstrating discordance in estimated risk between ML and STS, there appears to be a substantial decline in predictive performance suggesting vulnerability of the existing models in these patient subsets.