Literature DB >> 30453461

Outcome prediction of intracranial aneurysm treatment by flow diverters using machine learning.

Nikhil Paliwal1,2, Prakhar Jaiswal1, Vincent M Tutino2,3, Hussain Shallwani4, Jason M Davies4,5, Adnan H Siddiqui2,4, Rahul Rai1, Hui Meng1,3.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVEFlow diverters (FDs) are designed to occlude intracranial aneurysms (IAs) while preserving flow to essential arteries. Incomplete occlusion exposes patients to risks of thromboembolic complications and rupture. A priori assessment of FD treatment outcome could enable treatment optimization leading to better outcomes. To that end, the authors applied image-based computational analysis to clinically FD-treated aneurysms to extract information regarding morphology, pre- and post-treatment hemodynamics, and FD-device characteristics and then used these parameters to train machine learning algorithms to predict 6-month clinical outcomes after FD treatment.METHODSData were retrospectively collected for 84 FD-treated sidewall aneurysms in 80 patients. Based on 6-month angiographic outcomes, IAs were classified as occluded (n = 63) or residual (incomplete occlusion, n = 21). For each case, the authors modeled FD deployment using a fast virtual stenting algorithm and hemodynamics using image-based computational fluid dynamics. Sixteen morphological, hemodynamic, and FD-based parameters were calculated for each aneurysm. Aneurysms were randomly assigned to a training or testing cohort in approximately a 3:1 ratio. The Student t-test and Mann-Whitney U-test were performed on data from the training cohort to identify significant parameters distinguishing the occluded from residual groups. Predictive models were trained using 4 types of supervised machine learning algorithms: logistic regression (LR), support vector machine (SVM; linear and Gaussian kernels), K-nearest neighbor, and neural network (NN). In the testing cohort, the authors compared outcome prediction by each model trained using all parameters versus only the significant parameters.RESULTSThe training cohort (n = 64) consisted of 48 occluded and 16 residual aneurysms and the testing cohort (n = 20) consisted of 15 occluded and 5 residual aneurysms. Significance tests yielded 2 morphological (ostium ratio and neck ratio) and 3 hemodynamic (pre-treatment inflow rate, post-treatment inflow rate, and post-treatment aneurysm averaged velocity) discriminants between the occluded (good-outcome) and the residual (bad-outcome) group. In both training and testing, all the models trained using all 16 parameters performed better than all the models trained using only the 5 significant parameters. Among the all-parameter models, NN (AUC = 0.967) performed the best during training, followed by LR and linear SVM (AUC = 0.941 and 0.914, respectively). During testing, NN and Gaussian-SVM models had the highest accuracy (90%) in predicting occlusion outcome.CONCLUSIONSNN and Gaussian-SVM models incorporating all 16 morphological, hemodynamic, and FD-related parameters predicted 6-month occlusion outcome of FD treatment with 90% accuracy. More robust models using the computational workflow and machine learning could be trained on larger patient databases toward clinical use in patient-specific treatment planning and optimization.

Entities:  

Keywords:  AR = aspect ratio; AUC = area under the ROC curve; AV = averaged velocity; CFD = computational fluid dynamics; DSA = digital subtraction angiography; FD = flow diverter; IA = intracranial aneurysm; ICA = internal carotid artery; IR = inflow rate; K-NN = K-nearest neighbor; LR = logistic regression; MCR = metal coverage rate; ML = machine learning; ND = neck diameter; NN = neural network; NR = neck ratio; OsR = ostium ratio; PD = pore density; PED = Pipeline embolization device; Pipeline embolization device; ROC = receiver operating characteristic; SE = standard error; SHR = shear rate; SR = size ratio; SVM = support vector machine; TT = turnover time; computational fluid dynamics; flow diverter; intracranial aneurysm; machine learning; predictive models

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30453461      PMCID: PMC6421840          DOI: 10.3171/2018.8.FOCUS18332

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neurosurg Focus        ISSN: 1092-0684            Impact factor:   4.047


  36 in total

1.  Intra-aneurysmal thrombosis as a possible cause of delayed aneurysm rupture after flow-diversion treatment.

Authors:  Z Kulcsár; E Houdart; A Bonafé; G Parker; J Millar; A J P Goddard; S Renowden; G Gál; B Turowski; K Mitchell; F Gray; M Rodriguez; R van den Berg; A Gruber; H Desal; I Wanke; D A Rüfenacht
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2010-11-11       Impact factor: 3.825

Review 2.  Update on flow diverters for the endovascular management of cerebral aneurysms.

Authors:  Gary Rajah; Sandra Narayanan; Leonardo Rangel-Castilla
Journal:  Neurosurg Focus       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 4.047

3.  Ostium Ratio and Neck Ratio Could Predict the Outcome of Sidewall Intracranial Aneurysms Treated with Flow Diverters.

Authors:  N Paliwal; V M Tutino; H Shallwani; J S Beecher; R J Damiano; H J Shakir; G S Atwal; V S Fennell; S K Natarajan; E I Levy; A H Siddiqui; J M Davies; H Meng
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2019-01-24       Impact factor: 3.825

Review 4.  An introduction and overview of machine learning in neurosurgical care.

Authors:  Joeky T Senders; Mark M Zaki; Aditya V Karhade; Bliss Chang; William B Gormley; Marike L Broekman; Timothy R Smith; Omar Arnaout
Journal:  Acta Neurochir (Wien)       Date:  2017-11-13       Impact factor: 2.216

5.  High-fidelity virtual stenting: modeling of flow diverter deployment for hemodynamic characterization of complex intracranial aneurysms.

Authors:  Jianping Xiang; Robert J Damiano; Ning Lin; Kenneth V Snyder; Adnan H Siddiqui; Elad I Levy; Hui Meng
Journal:  J Neurosurg       Date:  2015-06-19       Impact factor: 5.115

6.  Treatment of intracranial aneurysms by functional reconstruction of the parent artery: the Budapest experience with the pipeline embolization device.

Authors:  I Szikora; Z Berentei; Z Kulcsar; M Marosfoi; Z S Vajda; W Lee; A Berez; P K Nelson
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2010-02-11       Impact factor: 3.825

7.  Compacting a Single Flow Diverter versus Overlapping Flow Diverters for Intracranial Aneurysms: A Computational Study.

Authors:  R J Damiano; V M Tutino; N Paliwal; D Ma; J M Davies; A H Siddiqui; H Meng
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2017-01-05       Impact factor: 3.825

8.  Using methods from the data-mining and machine-learning literature for disease classification and prediction: a case study examining classification of heart failure subtypes.

Authors:  Peter C Austin; Jack V Tu; Jennifer E Ho; Daniel Levy; Douglas S Lee
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2013-02-04       Impact factor: 6.437

9.  Curative endovascular reconstruction of cerebral aneurysms with the pipeline embolization device: the Buenos Aires experience.

Authors:  Pedro Lylyk; Carlos Miranda; Rosana Ceratto; Angel Ferrario; Esteban Scrivano; Hugh Ramirez Luna; Aaron L Berez; Quang Tran; Peter K Nelson; David Fiorella
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 4.654

10.  Cellular mechanisms of aneurysm occlusion after treatment with a flow diverter.

Authors:  Ramanathan Kadirvel; Yong-Hong Ding; Daying Dai; Issa Rezek; Debra A Lewis; David F Kallmes
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2013-10-28       Impact factor: 11.105

View more
  12 in total

Review 1.  Artificial Intelligence in the Management of Intracranial Aneurysms: Current Status and Future Perspectives.

Authors:  Z Shi; B Hu; U J Schoepf; R H Savage; D M Dargis; C W Pan; X L Li; Q Q Ni; G M Lu; L J Zhang
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2020-03-12       Impact factor: 3.825

2.  Aneurysm characteristics, coil packing, and post-coiling hemodynamics affect long-term treatment outcome.

Authors:  Robert J Damiano; Vincent M Tutino; Nikhil Paliwal; Tatsat R Patel; Muhammad Waqas; Elad I Levy; Jason M Davies; Adnan H Siddiqui; Hui Meng
Journal:  J Neurointerv Surg       Date:  2019-12-17       Impact factor: 5.836

3.  Large Neck and Strong Ostium Inflow as the Potential Causes for Delayed Occlusion of Unruptured Sidewall Intracranial Aneurysms Treated by Flow Diverter.

Authors:  T Su; P Reymond; O Brina; P Bouillot; P Machi; B M A Delattre; L Jin; K O Lövblad; M I Vargas
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2020-02-13       Impact factor: 3.825

4.  Machine Learning and Intracranial Aneurysms: From Detection to Outcome Prediction.

Authors:  Vittorio Stumpo; Victor E Staartjes; Giuseppe Esposito; Carlo Serra; Luca Regli; Alessandro Olivi; Carmelo Lucio Sturiale
Journal:  Acta Neurochir Suppl       Date:  2022

5.  Evaluation of Outcome Prediction of Flow Diversion for Intracranial Aneurysms.

Authors:  S Hadad; F Mut; R Kadirvel; Y-H Ding; D Kallmes; J R Cebral
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2021-08-26       Impact factor: 3.825

6.  Cerebral aneurysm flow diverter modeled as a thin inhomogeneous porous medium in hemodynamic simulations.

Authors:  Armin Abdehkakha; Adam L Hammond; Tatsat R Patel; Adnan H Siddiqui; Gary F Dargush; Hui Meng
Journal:  Comput Biol Med       Date:  2021-10-28       Impact factor: 6.698

7.  Development and assessment of machine learning models for predicting recurrence risk after endovascular treatment in patients with intracranial aneurysms.

Authors:  ShiTeng Lin; Yang Zou; Jue Hu; Lan Xiang; LeHeng Guo; XinPing Lin; DaiZun Zou; Xiaoping Gao; Hui Liang; JianJun Zou; ZhiHong Zhao; XiaoMing Dai
Journal:  Neurosurg Rev       Date:  2021-10-18       Impact factor: 2.800

8.  Retrospective analysis of intracranial aneurysms after flow diverter treatment including color-coded imaging (syngo iFlow) as a predictor of aneurysm occlusion.

Authors:  Andreas Simgen; Christine Mayer; Michael Kettner; Ruben Mühl-Benninghaus; Wolfgang Reith; Umut Yilmaz
Journal:  Interv Neuroradiol       Date:  2021-06-09       Impact factor: 1.764

9.  Automated Machine Learning Model Development for Intracranial Aneurysm Treatment Outcome Prediction: A Feasibility Study.

Authors:  Chubin Ou; Jiahui Liu; Yi Qian; Winston Chong; Dangqi Liu; Xuying He; Xin Zhang; Chuan-Zhi Duan
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2021-11-29       Impact factor: 4.003

10.  Implementation of computer simulation to assess flow diversion treatment outcomes: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Mingzi Zhang; Simon Tupin; Hitomi Anzai; Yutaro Kohata; Masaaki Shojima; Kosuke Suzuki; Yoshihiro Okamoto; Katsuhiro Tanaka; Takanobu Yagi; Soichiro Fujimura; Makoto Ohta
Journal:  J Neurointerv Surg       Date:  2020-10-23       Impact factor: 5.836

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.