Machine learning based outcome prediction of microsurgically treated unruptured intracranial aneurysms

Abstract

Machine learning (ML) has revolutionized data processing in recent years. This study presents the results of the first prediction models based on a long-term monocentric data registry of patients with microsurgically treated unruptured intracranial aneurysms (UIAs) using a temporal train-test split. Temporal train-test splits allow to simulate prospective validation, and therefore provide more accurate estimations of a model’s predictive quality when applied to future patients. ML models for the prediction of the Glasgow outcome scale, modified Rankin Scale (mRS), and new transient or permanent neurological deficits (output variables) were created from all UIA patients that underwent microsurgery at the Kepler University Hospital Linz (Austria) between 2002 and 2020 (n = 466), based on 18 patient- and 10 aneurysm-specific preoperative parameters (input variables). Train-test splitting was performed with a temporal split for outcome prediction in microsurgical therapy of UIA. Moreover, an external validation was conducted on an independent external data set (n = 256) of the Department of Neurosurgery, University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf. In total, 722 aneurysms were included in this study. A postoperative mRS > 2 was best predicted by a quadratic discriminant analysis (QDA) estimator in the internal test set, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC-AUC) of 0.87 ± 0.03 and a sensitivity and specificity of 0.83 ± 0.08 and 0.71 ± 0.07, respectively. A Multilayer Perceptron predicted the post- to preoperative mRS difference > 1 with a ROC-AUC of 0.70 ± 0.02 and a sensitivity and specificity of 0.74 ± 0.07 and 0.50 ± 0.04, respectively. The QDA was the best model for predicting a permanent new neurological deficit with a ROC-AUC of 0.71 ± 0.04 and a sensitivity and specificity of 0.65 ± 0.24 and 0.60 ± 0.12, respectively. Furthermore, these models performed significantly better than the classic logistic regression models (p < 0.0001). The present results showed good performance in predicting functional and clinical outcomes after microsurgical therapy of UIAs in the internal data set, especially for the main outcome parameters, mRS and permanent neurological deficit. The external validation showed poor discrimination with ROC-AUC values of 0.61, 0.53 and 0.58 respectively for predicting a postoperative mRS > 2, a pre- and postoperative difference in mRS > 1 point and a GOS < 5. Therefore, generalizability of the models could not be demonstrated in the external validation. A SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) analysis revealed that this is due to the most important features being distributed quite differently in the internal and external data sets. The implementation of newly available data and the merging of larger databases to form more broad-based predictive models is imperative in the future.

Complex networks approach to study comorbidities in patients with unruptured intracranial aneurysms

“…Co-morbidities of group C are primarily detected in women. Specifically, they are diseases like Streptococcal pharyngitis (ICD J02.0) 11 , 12 , chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (ICD J44.8) 13 , hypothyroidism (ICD E03.9) 14 , 15 and panic disorder (ICD F41.0). In men, group C comorbidity is limited to depression (ICD F32.9).…”

Prediction of Intracranial Pressure in Patients with an Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage Using Optic Nerve Sheath Diameter via Explainable Predictive Modeling

“…While AI techniques offer considerable potential for improving clinical outcome predictions, their limitations should be approached with caution, such as global and local interpretation (Figures 3 and 4) [44,45]. Clinical researchers and healthcare professionals must remain vigilant regarding potential biases and limitations associated with AI algorithms.…”

A comprehensive investigation of morphological features responsible for cerebral aneurysm rupture using machine learning

“…The rupture of aneurysms can be caused by various factors, including biological influences, such as the degradation of the vessel wall 6 , hemodynamic features, such as wall shear stress 7 , and clinical factors, such as smoking, obesity, diabetes, and a sedentary lifestyle 8 . Moreover, the location of the aneurysm is also considered an important parameter 9 . Geometric properties of an aneurysm are also significant indicators.…”