Machine learning approaches for risk prediction after percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review and
Ammar Zaka1, Daud Mutahar2, James Gorcilov2
1Department of Cardiology, Gold Coast University Hospital, 1 Hospital Boulevard, Southport, QLD 4215, Australia.
Machine learning (ML) models showed slightly better prediction for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and major bleeding after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Further research is needed due to limitations in current ML models for clinical use.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Medical Informatics
- Data Science
Background:
- Accurate prediction of clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is crucial for patient management and risk mitigation.
- Traditional risk models offer modest predictive value, necessitating exploration of advanced methods.
- Machine learning (ML) models present a potential alternative for enhanced risk stratification in PCI patients.
Purpose of the Study:
- To systematically compare the predictive accuracy of ML models against traditional statistical methods for key clinical events post-PCI.
- To evaluate the performance of ML models in stratifying risk for all-cause mortality, major bleeding, and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE).
Main Methods:
- A systematic review and meta-analysis adhering to PRISMA-P guidelines was conducted.
- Searches of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases were performed up to November 1, 2023.
- Comparative discrimination was assessed using C-statistics, comparing 34 ML models with traditional methods across 13 observational studies involving over 4 million patients.
Main Results:
- ML models demonstrated a pooled C-statistic of 0.89 for all-cause mortality versus 0.86 for traditional methods (P=0.54).
- For major bleeding, ML models achieved a pooled C-statistic of 0.80 compared to 0.78 for traditional methods (P=0.02).
- ML models showed superior discrimination for MACE with a C-statistic of 0.83 versus 0.71 for traditional methods (P=0.007).
Conclusions:
- Machine learning models offer marginal improvements in predicting MACE and major bleeding following PCI compared to traditional risk scores.
- The clinical implementation of ML for peri-procedural risk stratification requires further investigation due to current methodological and validation limitations.
- Additional research is essential to address biases and enhance the reliability of ML models in clinical practice.
More Related Videos
10:03Coronary Progenitor Cells and Soluble Biomarkers in Cardiovascular Prognosis after Coronary Angioplasty
Published on: January 28, 2020
07:25Predicting Amputation using Local Circulating Mononuclear Progenitor Cells in Angioplasty-treated Patients with Critical Limb Ischemia
Published on: September 22, 2020
Related Concept Videos
Assessment of blood pressure in brachial artery(two-step method)
Pre-Procedural Guidelines for Assessing Blood Pressure
Assessment of the Cardiovascular System III: Palpation
Jugular Venous Pressure (JVP) Measurement
Position the patient at a thirty- to forty-five-degree angle or in a semi-fowler's position. Look for the highest point of pulsation in the internal jugular vein and measure the vertical distance to the angle of Loius or sternal angle. A normal JVP is 3-4 cm above...
Peripheral Arterial Disease II: Clinical Manifestations and Diagnostic Evaluation
Varicose Veins II: Diagnostic Studies and Interprofessional Care
