Machine Learning to Optimize the Echocardiographic Follow-Up of Aortic Stenosis.

BACKGROUND: Disease progression in patients with mild-to-moderate aortic stenosis is heterogenous and requires periodic echocardiographic examinations to evaluate severity. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to explore the use of machine learning to optimize aortic stenosis echocardiographic surveillance automatically. METHODS: The study investigators trained, validated, and externally applied a machine learning model to predict whether a patient with mild-to-moderate aortic stenosis will develop severe valvular disease at 1, 2, or 3 years. Demographic and echocardiographic patient data to develop the model were obtained from a tertiary hospital consisting of 4,633 echocardiograms from 1,638 consecutive patients. The external cohort was obtained from an independent tertiary hospital, consisting of 4,531 echocardiograms from 1,533 patients. Echocardiographic surveillance timing results were compared with the European and American guidelines echocardiographic follow-up recommendations. RESULTS: In internal validation, the model discriminated severe from nonsevere aortic stenosis development with an area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC) of 0.90, 0.92, and 0.92 for the 1-, 2-, or 3-year interval, respectively. In external application, the model showed an AUC-ROC of 0.85, 0.85, and 0.85, for the 1-, 2-, or 3-year interval. A simulated application of the model in the external validation cohort resulted in savings of 49% and 13% of unnecessary echocardiographic examinations per year compared with European and American guideline recommendations, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Machine learning provides real-time, automated, personalized timing of next echocardiographic follow-up examination for patients with mild-to-moderate aortic stenosis. Compared with European and American guidelines, the model reduces the number of patient examinations.

Outcome Analysis in Elective Electrical Cardioversion of Atrial Fibrillation Patients: Development and Validation of a Machine Learning Prognostic Model.

Background: The integrated approach to electrical cardioversion (EC) in atrial fibrillation (AF) is complex; candidates can resolve spontaneously while waiting for EC, and post-cardioversion recurrence is high. Thus, it is especially interesting to avoid the programming of EC in patients who would restore sinus rhythm (SR) spontaneously or present early recurrence. We have analyzed the whole elective EC of the AF process using machine-learning (ML) in order to enable a more realistic and detailed simulation of the patient flow for decision making purposes. Methods: The dataset consisted of electronic health records (EHRs) from 429 consecutive AF patients referred for EC. For analysis of the patient outcome, we considered five pathways according to restoring and maintaining SR: (i) spontaneous SR restoration, (ii) pharmacologic-cardioversion, (iii) direct-current cardioversion, (iv) 6-month AF recurrence, and (v) 6-month rhythm control. We applied ML classifiers for predicting outcomes at each pathway and compared them with the CHA2DS2-VASc and HATCH scores. Results: With the exception of pathway (iii), all ML models achieved improvements in comparison with CHA2DS2-VASc or HATCH scores (p < 0.01). Compared to the most competitive score, the area under the ROC curve (AUC-ROC) was: 0.80 vs. 0.66 for predicting (i); 0.71 vs. 0.55 for (ii); 0.64 vs. 0.52 for (iv); and 0.66 vs. 0.51 for (v). For a threshold considered optimal, the empirical net reclassification index was: +7.8%, +47.2%, +28.2%, and +34.3% in favor of our ML models for predicting outcomes for pathways (i), (ii), (iv), and (v), respectively. As an example tool of generalizability of ML models, we deployed our algorithms in an open-source calculator, where the model would personalize predictions. Conclusions: An ML model improves the accuracy of restoring and maintaining SR predictions over current discriminators. The proposed approach enables a detailed simulation of the patient flow through personalized predictions.

Predictive Power for Thrombus Detection after Atrial Appendage Closure: Machine Learning vs. Classical Methods.

Device-related thrombus (DRT) after left atrial appendage (LAA) closure is infrequent but correlates with an increased risk of thromboembolism. Therefore, the search for DRT predictors is a topic of interest. In the literature, multivariable methods have been used achieving non-consistent results, and to the best of our knowledge, machine learning techniques have not been used yet for thrombus detection after LAA occlusion. Our aim is to compare both methodologies with respect to predictive power and the search for predictors of DRT. To this end, a multicenter study including 1150 patients who underwent LAA closure was analyzed. Two lines of experiments were performed: with and without resampling. Multivariate and machine learning methodologies were applied to both lines. Predictive power and the extracted predictors for all experiments were gathered. ROC curves of 0.5446 and 0.7974 were obtained for multivariate analysis and machine learning without resampling, respectively. However, the resampling experiment showed no significant difference between them (0.52 vs. 0.53 ROC AUC). A difference between the predictors selected was observed, with the multivariable methodology being more stable. These results question the validity of predictors reported in previous studies and demonstrate their disparity. Furthermore, none of the techniques analyzed is superior to the other for these data.

Development of a severity of disease score and classification model by machine learning for hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

BACKGROUND: Efficient and early triage of hospitalized Covid-19 patients to detect those with higher risk of severe disease is essential for appropriate case management. METHODS: We trained, validated, and externally tested a machine-learning model to early identify patients who will die or require mechanical ventilation during hospitalization from clinical and laboratory features obtained at admission. A development cohort with 918 Covid-19 patients was used for training and internal validation, and 352 patients from another hospital were used for external testing. Performance of the model was evaluated by calculating the area under the receiver-operating-characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity and specificity. RESULTS: A total of 363 of 918 (39.5%) and 128 of 352 (36.4%) Covid-19 patients from the development and external testing cohort, respectively, required mechanical ventilation or died during hospitalization. In the development cohort, the model obtained an AUC of 0.85 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.82 to 0.87) for predicting severity of disease progression. Variables ranked according to their contribution to the model were the peripheral blood oxygen saturation (SpO2)/fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) ratio, age, estimated glomerular filtration rate, procalcitonin, C-reactive protein, updated Charlson comorbidity index and lymphocytes. In the external testing cohort, the model performed an AUC of 0.83 (95% CI, 0.81 to 0.85). This model is deployed in an open source calculator, in which Covid-19 patients at admission are individually stratified as being at high or non-high risk for severe disease progression. CONCLUSIONS: This machine-learning model, applied at hospital admission, predicts risk of severe disease progression in Covid-19 patients.

Date of Admission during COVID-19 Pandemic Impacted Patient Outcomes in Addition to the Higher Efficacy of Tocilizumab Plus High-Dose Corticosteroid Therapy Compared to Tocilizumab Alone.

BACKGROUND: The evidence for the efficacy of glucocorticoids combined with tocilizumab (TCZ) in COVID-19 comes from observational studies or subgroup analysis. Our aim was to compare outcomes between hospitalized COVID-19 patients who received high-dose corticosteroid pulse therapy and TCZ and those who received TCZ. METHODS: A retrospective single-center study was performed on consecutive hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19 between 1 March and 23 April 2020. Patients treated with either TCZ (400-600 mg, one to two doses) and methylprednisolone pulses (MPD-TCZ group) or TCZ alone were analyzed for the occurrence of a combined endpoint of death and need for invasive mechanical ventilation during admission. The independence of both treatment groups was tested using machine learning classifiers, and relevant variables that were potentially different between the groups were measured through a mean decrease accuracy algorithm. RESULTS: An earlier date of admission was significantly associated with worse outcomes regardless of treatment type. Twenty patients died (27.0%) in the TCZ group, and 33 (44.6%) died or required intubation (n = 74), whereas in the MPD-TCZ group, 15 (11.0%) patients died and 29 (21.3%) patients reached the combined endpoint (n = 136; p = 0.006 and p < 0.001, respectively). Machine learning methodology using a random forest classifier confirmed significant differences between the treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: MPD and TCZ improved outcomes (death and invasive mechanical ventilation) among hospitalized COVID-19 patients, but confounding variables such as the date of admission during the COVID-19 pandemic should be considered in observational studies.

Machine Learning to Predict Stent Restenosis Based on Daily Demographic, Clinical, and Angiographic Characteristics.

BACKGROUND: Machine learning (ML) has arrived in medicine to deliver individually adapted medical care. This study sought to use ML to discriminate stent restenosis (SR) compared with existing predictive scores of SR. To develop an easily applicable model, we performed our predictions without any additional variables other than those obtained in daily practice. METHODS: The dataset, obtained from the Grupo de Análisis de la Cardiopatía Isquémica Aguda (GRACIA)-3 trial, consisted of 263 patients with demographic, clinical, and angiographic characteristics; 23 (9%) of them presented with SR at 12 months after stent implantation. A methodology to work with small imbalanced datasets, based in cross-validation and the precision/recall (PR) plots, was used, and state-of-the-art ML classifiers were trained. RESULTS: Our best performing model (0.46, area under the PR curve [AUC-PR]) was developed with an extremely randomized trees classifier, which showed better performance than chance alone (0.09 AUC-PR, corresponding to the 9% of patients presenting SR in our dataset) and 3 existing scores; Prevention of Restenosis With Tranilast and its Outcomes (PRESTO)-1 (0.31 AUC-PR), PRESTO-2 (0.27 AUC-PR), and Evaluation of Drug-Eluting Stents and Ischemic Events (EVENT) (0.18 AUC-PR). The most important variables ranked according to their contribution to the predictions were diabetes, ≥2 vessel-coronary disease, post-percutaneous coronary intervention thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (PCI TIMI)-flow, abnormal platelets, post-PCI thrombus, and abnormal cholesterol. To counteract the lack of external validation for our study, we deployed our ML algorithm in an open source calculator, in which the model would stratify patients of high and low risk as an example tool to determine generalizability of prediction models from small imbalanced sample size. CONCLUSIONS: Applied immediately after stent implantation, a ML model better differentiates those patients who will present with SR over current discriminators.