Predicting the Stone-Free Status of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy with the Machine Learning System

Abstract

The study aimed to create a machine learning model (MLM) to predict the stone-free status (SFS) of patients undergoing percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and compare its performance to the S.T.O.N.E. and Guy's stone scores. Patients and Methods: This is a retrospective study that included 320 PCNL patients. Pre-operative and post-operative variables were extracted and entered into three MLMs: RFC, SVM, and XGBoost. The methods used to assess the performance of each were mean bootstrap estimate, 10-fold cross-validation, classification report, and AUC. Each model was externally validated and evaluated by mean bootstrap estimate with CI, classification report, and AUC. Results: Out of the 320 patients who underwent PCNL, the SFS was found to be 69.4%. The RFC mean bootstrap estimate was 0.75 and 95% CI: [0.65-0.85], 10-fold cross-validation of 0.744, an accuracy of 0.74, and AUC of 0.761. The XGBoost results were 0.74 [0.63-0.85], 0.759, 0.72, and 0.769, respectively. The SVM results were 0.70 [0.60-0.79], 0.725, 0.74, and 0.751, respectively. The AUC of Guy's stone score and the S.T.O.N.E. score were 0.666 and 0.71, respectively. The RFC external validation set had a mean bootstrap estimate of 0.87 and 95% CI: [0.81-0.92], an accuracy of 0.70, and an AUC of 0.795, While the XGBoost results were 0.84 [0.78-0.91], 0.74, and 0.84, respectively. The SVM results were 0.86 [0.80-0.91], 0.79, and 0.858, respectively. Conclusion: MLMs can be used with high accuracy in predicting SFS for patients undergoing PCNL. MLMs we utilized predicted the SFS with AUCs superior to those of GSS and S.T.O.N.E scores.

Can Machine Learning Correctly Predict Outcomes of Flexible Ureteroscopy with Laser Lithotripsy for Kidney Stone Disease? Results from a Large Endourology University Centre

“…Our results show that a larger overall stone size was associated with lower likelihood of achieving SFS. This aligns with prior results emphasising the precision of overall stone size in determining outcomes [13] . However, consideration of the methodological variations for measurement of stone volume and the parameters that affect stone burden, such as number and shape, is essential.…”