Machine learning–derived major adverse event prediction of patients undergoing transvenous lead extraction: Using the ESC EHRA EORP European lead extraction ConTRolled ELECTRa registry
Transvenous lead extraction (TLE) remains a high-risk procedure. The purpose of this study was to develop a machine learning (ML)–based risk stratification system to predict the risk of major adverse events (MAEs) after TLE. A MAE was defined as procedure-related major complication and procedure-rel...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Heart rhythm 2022-06, Vol.19 (6), p.885-893 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Transvenous lead extraction (TLE) remains a high-risk procedure.
The purpose of this study was to develop a machine learning (ML)–based risk stratification system to predict the risk of major adverse events (MAEs) after TLE. A MAE was defined as procedure-related major complication and procedure-related death.
We designed and evaluated an ML-based risk stratification system trained using the European Lead Extraction ConTRolled (ELECTRa) registry to predict the risk of MAEs in 3555 patients undergoing TLE and tested this on an independent registry of 1171 patients. ML models were developed, including a self-normalizing neural network (SNN), stepwise logistic regression model (“stepwise model”), support vector machines, and random forest model. These were compared with the ELECTRa Registry Outcome Score (EROS) for MAEs.
There were 53 MAEs (1.7%) in the training cohort and 24 (2.4%) in the test cohort. Thirty-two clinically important features were used to train the models. ML techniques were similar to EROS by balanced accuracy (stepwise model: 0.74 vs EROS: 0.70) and superior by area under the curve (support vector machines: 0.764 vs EROS: 0.677). The SNN provided a finite risk for MAE and accurately identified MAE in 14 of 169 “high (>80%) risk” patients (8.3%) and no MAEs in all 198 “low ( |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1547-5271 1556-3871 1556-3871 |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.hrthm.2021.12.036 |