Cargando…
Comparison of conventional scoring systems to machine learning models for the prediction of major adverse cardiovascular events in patients undergoing coronary computed tomography angiography
BACKGROUND: The study aims to compare the prognostic performance of conventional scoring systems to a machine learning (ML) model on coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) to discriminate between the patients with and without major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) and to find the most...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9643500/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36386332 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2022.994483 |
_version_ | 1784826541654409216 |
---|---|
author | Ghorashi, Seyyed Mojtaba Fazeli, Amir Hedayat, Behnam Mokhtari, Hamid Jalali, Arash Ahmadi, Pooria Chalian, Hamid Bragazzi, Nicola Luigi Shirani, Shapour Omidi, Negar |
author_facet | Ghorashi, Seyyed Mojtaba Fazeli, Amir Hedayat, Behnam Mokhtari, Hamid Jalali, Arash Ahmadi, Pooria Chalian, Hamid Bragazzi, Nicola Luigi Shirani, Shapour Omidi, Negar |
author_sort | Ghorashi, Seyyed Mojtaba |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The study aims to compare the prognostic performance of conventional scoring systems to a machine learning (ML) model on coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) to discriminate between the patients with and without major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) and to find the most important contributing factor of MACE. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From November to December 2019, 500 of 1586 CCTA scans were included and analyzed, then six conventional scores were calculated for each participant, and seven ML models were designed. Our study endpoints were all-cause mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction, late coronary revascularization, and hospitalization for unstable angina or heart failure. Score performance was assessed by area under the curve (AUC) analysis. RESULTS: Of 500 patients (mean age: 60 ± 10; 53.8% male subjects) referred for CCTA, 416 patients have met inclusion criteria, 46 patients with early (<90 days) cardiac evaluation (due to the inability to clarify the reason for the assessment, deterioration of the symptoms vs. the CCTA result), and 38 patients because of missed follow-up were not enrolled in the final analysis. Forty-six patients (11.0%) developed MACE within 20.5 ± 7.9 months of follow-up. Compared to conventional scores, ML models showed better performance, except only one model which is eXtreme Gradient Boosting had lower performance than conventional scoring systems (AUC:0.824, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.701–0.947). Between ML models, random forest, ensemble with generalized linear, and ensemble with naive Bayes were shown to have higher prognostic performance (AUC: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.85–0.99, AUC: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.81–0.98, and AUC: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.82–0.97), respectively. Coronary artery calcium score (CACS) had the highest correlation with MACE. CONCLUSION: Compared to the conventional scoring system, ML models using CCTA scans show improved prognostic prediction for MACE. Anatomical features were more important than clinical characteristics. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9643500 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-96435002022-11-15 Comparison of conventional scoring systems to machine learning models for the prediction of major adverse cardiovascular events in patients undergoing coronary computed tomography angiography Ghorashi, Seyyed Mojtaba Fazeli, Amir Hedayat, Behnam Mokhtari, Hamid Jalali, Arash Ahmadi, Pooria Chalian, Hamid Bragazzi, Nicola Luigi Shirani, Shapour Omidi, Negar Front Cardiovasc Med Cardiovascular Medicine BACKGROUND: The study aims to compare the prognostic performance of conventional scoring systems to a machine learning (ML) model on coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) to discriminate between the patients with and without major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) and to find the most important contributing factor of MACE. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From November to December 2019, 500 of 1586 CCTA scans were included and analyzed, then six conventional scores were calculated for each participant, and seven ML models were designed. Our study endpoints were all-cause mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction, late coronary revascularization, and hospitalization for unstable angina or heart failure. Score performance was assessed by area under the curve (AUC) analysis. RESULTS: Of 500 patients (mean age: 60 ± 10; 53.8% male subjects) referred for CCTA, 416 patients have met inclusion criteria, 46 patients with early (<90 days) cardiac evaluation (due to the inability to clarify the reason for the assessment, deterioration of the symptoms vs. the CCTA result), and 38 patients because of missed follow-up were not enrolled in the final analysis. Forty-six patients (11.0%) developed MACE within 20.5 ± 7.9 months of follow-up. Compared to conventional scores, ML models showed better performance, except only one model which is eXtreme Gradient Boosting had lower performance than conventional scoring systems (AUC:0.824, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.701–0.947). Between ML models, random forest, ensemble with generalized linear, and ensemble with naive Bayes were shown to have higher prognostic performance (AUC: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.85–0.99, AUC: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.81–0.98, and AUC: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.82–0.97), respectively. Coronary artery calcium score (CACS) had the highest correlation with MACE. CONCLUSION: Compared to the conventional scoring system, ML models using CCTA scans show improved prognostic prediction for MACE. Anatomical features were more important than clinical characteristics. Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-10-26 /pmc/articles/PMC9643500/ /pubmed/36386332 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2022.994483 Text en Copyright © 2022 Ghorashi, Fazeli, Hedayat, Mokhtari, Jalali, Ahmadi, Chalian, Bragazzi, Shirani and Omidi. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Cardiovascular Medicine Ghorashi, Seyyed Mojtaba Fazeli, Amir Hedayat, Behnam Mokhtari, Hamid Jalali, Arash Ahmadi, Pooria Chalian, Hamid Bragazzi, Nicola Luigi Shirani, Shapour Omidi, Negar Comparison of conventional scoring systems to machine learning models for the prediction of major adverse cardiovascular events in patients undergoing coronary computed tomography angiography |
title | Comparison of conventional scoring systems to machine learning models for the prediction of major adverse cardiovascular events in patients undergoing coronary computed tomography angiography |
title_full | Comparison of conventional scoring systems to machine learning models for the prediction of major adverse cardiovascular events in patients undergoing coronary computed tomography angiography |
title_fullStr | Comparison of conventional scoring systems to machine learning models for the prediction of major adverse cardiovascular events in patients undergoing coronary computed tomography angiography |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of conventional scoring systems to machine learning models for the prediction of major adverse cardiovascular events in patients undergoing coronary computed tomography angiography |
title_short | Comparison of conventional scoring systems to machine learning models for the prediction of major adverse cardiovascular events in patients undergoing coronary computed tomography angiography |
title_sort | comparison of conventional scoring systems to machine learning models for the prediction of major adverse cardiovascular events in patients undergoing coronary computed tomography angiography |
topic | Cardiovascular Medicine |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9643500/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36386332 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2022.994483 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ghorashiseyyedmojtaba comparisonofconventionalscoringsystemstomachinelearningmodelsforthepredictionofmajoradversecardiovasculareventsinpatientsundergoingcoronarycomputedtomographyangiography AT fazeliamir comparisonofconventionalscoringsystemstomachinelearningmodelsforthepredictionofmajoradversecardiovasculareventsinpatientsundergoingcoronarycomputedtomographyangiography AT hedayatbehnam comparisonofconventionalscoringsystemstomachinelearningmodelsforthepredictionofmajoradversecardiovasculareventsinpatientsundergoingcoronarycomputedtomographyangiography AT mokhtarihamid comparisonofconventionalscoringsystemstomachinelearningmodelsforthepredictionofmajoradversecardiovasculareventsinpatientsundergoingcoronarycomputedtomographyangiography AT jalaliarash comparisonofconventionalscoringsystemstomachinelearningmodelsforthepredictionofmajoradversecardiovasculareventsinpatientsundergoingcoronarycomputedtomographyangiography AT ahmadipooria comparisonofconventionalscoringsystemstomachinelearningmodelsforthepredictionofmajoradversecardiovasculareventsinpatientsundergoingcoronarycomputedtomographyangiography AT chalianhamid comparisonofconventionalscoringsystemstomachinelearningmodelsforthepredictionofmajoradversecardiovasculareventsinpatientsundergoingcoronarycomputedtomographyangiography AT bragazzinicolaluigi comparisonofconventionalscoringsystemstomachinelearningmodelsforthepredictionofmajoradversecardiovasculareventsinpatientsundergoingcoronarycomputedtomographyangiography AT shiranishapour comparisonofconventionalscoringsystemstomachinelearningmodelsforthepredictionofmajoradversecardiovasculareventsinpatientsundergoingcoronarycomputedtomographyangiography AT omidinegar comparisonofconventionalscoringsystemstomachinelearningmodelsforthepredictionofmajoradversecardiovasculareventsinpatientsundergoingcoronarycomputedtomographyangiography |