Using machine learning for the personalised prediction of revision endoscopic sinus surgery

BACKGROUND: Revision endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) is often considered for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) if maximal conservative treatment and baseline ESS prove insufficient. Emerging research outlines the risk factors of revision ESS. However, accurately predicting revision ESS at the individual level remains uncertain. This study aims to examine the prediction accuracy of revision ESS and to identify the effects of risk factors at the individual level. METHODS: We collected demographic and clinical variables from the electronic health records of 767 surgical CRS patients ≥16 years of age. Revision ESS was performed on 111 (14.5%) patients. The prediction accuracy of revision ESS was examined by training and validating different machine learning models, while the effects of variables were analysed using the Shapley values and partial dependence plots. RESULTS: The logistic regression, gradient boosting and random forest classifiers performed similarly in predicting revision ESS. Area under the receiving operating characteristic curve (AUROC) values were 0.744, 0.741 and 0.730, respectively, using data collected from the baseline visit until six months after baseline ESS. The length of time during which data were collected improved the prediction performance. For data collection times of 0, 3, 6 and 12 months after baseline ESS, AUROC values for the logistic regression were 0.682, 0.715, 0.744 and 0.784, respectively. The number of visits before or after baseline ESS, the number of days from the baseline visit to the baseline ESS, patient age, CRS with nasal polyps (CRSwNP), asthma, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug exacerbated respiratory disease and immunodeficiency or suspicion of it all associated with revision ESS. Patient age and number of visits before baseline ESS carried non-linear effects for predictions. CONCLUSIONS: Intelligent data analysis identified important predictors of revision ESS at the individual level, such as the frequency of clinical visits, patient age, Type 2 high diseases and immunodeficiency or a suspicion of it.