Literature DB >> 21295635

Artificial neural networks accurately predict mortality in patients with nonvariceal upper GI bleeding.

Gianluca Rotondano1, Livio Cipolletta, Enzo Grossi, Maurizio Koch, Marco Intraligi, Massimo Buscema, Riccardo Marmo.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Risk stratification systems that accurately identify patients with a high risk for bleeding through the use of clinical predictors of mortality before endoscopic examination are needed. Computerized (artificial) neural networks (ANNs) are adaptive tools that may improve prognostication.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the capability of an ANN to predict mortality in patients with nonvariceal upper GI bleeding and compare the predictive performance of the ANN with that of the Rockall score.
DESIGN: Prospective, multicenter study.
SETTING: Academic and community hospitals. PATIENTS: This study involved 2380 patients with nonvariceal upper GI bleeding. INTERVENTION: Upper GI endoscopy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome variable was 30-day mortality, defined as any death occurring within 30 days of the index bleeding episode. Other outcome variables were recurrent bleeding and need for surgery.
RESULTS: We performed analysis of certified outcomes of 2380 patients with nonvariceal upper GI bleeding. The Rockall score was compared with a supervised ANN (TWIST system, Semeion), adopting the same result validation protocol with random allocation of the sample in training and testing subsets and subsequent crossover. Overall, death occurred in 112 cases (4.70%). Of 68 pre-endoscopic input variables, 17 were selected and used by the ANN versus 16 included in the Rockall score. The sensitivity of the ANN-based model was 83.8% (76.7-90.8) versus 71.4% (62.8-80.0) for the Rockall score. Specificity was 97.5 (96.8-98.2) and 52.0 (49.8 4.2), respectively. Accuracy was 96.8% (96.0-97.5) versus 52.9% (50.8-55.0) (P<.001). The predictive performance of the ANN-based model for prediction of mortality was significantly superior to that of the complete Rockall score (area under the curve 0.95 [0.92-0.98] vs 0.67 [0.65-0.69]; P<.001). LIMITATIONS: External validation on a subsequent independent population is needed, patients with variceal bleeding and obscure GI hemorrhage are excluded.
CONCLUSION: In patients with nonvariceal upper GI bleeding, ANNs are significantly superior to the Rockall score in predicting the risk of death.
Copyright © 2011 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21295635     DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2010.10.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc        ISSN: 0016-5107            Impact factor:   9.427


  16 in total

Review 1.  Application of machine learning algorithms for clinical predictive modeling: a data-mining approach in SCT.

Authors:  R Shouval; O Bondi; H Mishan; A Shimoni; R Unger; A Nagler
Journal:  Bone Marrow Transplant       Date:  2013-10-07       Impact factor: 5.483

Review 2.  Upper gastrointestinal bleeding risk scores: Who, when and why?

Authors:  Sara Monteiro; Tiago Cúrdia Gonçalves; Joana Magalhães; José Cotter
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Pathophysiol       Date:  2016-02-15

3.  Using an 'action set' for the management of acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

Authors:  Marinos Pericleous; Charles Murray; Mark Hamilton; Owen Epstein; Rupert Negus; Tim Peachey; Arvind Kaul; James O'Beirne
Journal:  Therap Adv Gastroenterol       Date:  2013-11       Impact factor: 4.409

4.  Validation of a Machine Learning Model That Outperforms Clinical Risk Scoring Systems for Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding.

Authors:  Dennis L Shung; Benjamin Au; Richard Andrew Taylor; J Kenneth Tay; Stig B Laursen; Adrian J Stanley; Harry R Dalton; Jeffrey Ngu; Michael Schultz; Loren Laine
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2019-09-25       Impact factor: 22.682

Review 5.  Update on risk scoring systems for patients with upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage.

Authors:  Adrian J Stanley
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2012-06-14       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 6.  Diagnosis and management of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

Authors:  Marc Bardou; Dalila Benhaberou-Brun; Isabelle Le Ray; Alan N Barkun
Journal:  Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2012-01-10       Impact factor: 46.802

Review 7.  Application Status and Prospects of Artificial Intelligence in Peptic Ulcers.

Authors:  Peng-Yue Zhao; Ke Han; Ren-Qi Yao; Chao Ren; Xiao-Hui Du
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2022-06-16

8.  Machine Learning to Predict Outcomes in Patients with Acute Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Dennis Shung; Michael Simonov; Mark Gentry; Benjamin Au; Loren Laine
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2019-05-04       Impact factor: 3.199

9.  Pregnancy risk factors in autism: a pilot study with artificial neural networks.

Authors:  Enzo Grossi; Federica Veggo; Antonio Narzisi; Angelo Compare; Filippo Muratori
Journal:  Pediatr Res       Date:  2015-11-02       Impact factor: 3.756

10.  Outcome predictors in autism spectrum disorders preschoolers undergoing treatment as usual: insights from an observational study using artificial neural networks.

Authors:  Antonio Narzisi; Filippo Muratori; Massimo Buscema; Sara Calderoni; Enzo Grossi
Journal:  Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat       Date:  2015-06-30       Impact factor: 2.570

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.