Author:
Chung Timothy K.,Gueldner Pete H.,Aloziem Okechukwu U.,Liang Nathan L.,Vorp David A.
Abstract
AbstractAbdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) have been rigorously investigated to understand when their clinically-estimated risk of rupture—an event that is the 13th leading cause of death in the US—exceeds the risk associated with repair. Yet the current clinical guideline remains a one-size-fits-all “maximum diameter criterion” whereby AAA exceeding a threshold diameter is thought to make the risk of rupture high enough to warrant intervention. However, between 7 and 23.4% of smaller-sized AAA have been reported to rupture with diameters below the threshold. In this study, we train and assess machine learning models using clinical, biomechanical, and morphological indices from 381 patients to develop an aneurysm prognosis classifier to predict one of three outcomes for a given AAA patient: their AAA will remain stable, their AAA will require repair based as currently indicated from the maximum diameter criterion, or their AAA will rupture. This study represents the largest cohort of AAA patients that utilizes the first available medical image and clinical data to classify patient outcomes. The APC model therefore represents a potential clinical tool to striate specific patient outcomes using machine learning models and patient-specific image-based (biomechanical and morphological) and clinical data as input. Such a tool could greatly assist clinicians in their management decisions for patients with AAA.
Funder
Pittsburgh Health Data Alliance
Clinical and Translational Science Institute, University of Pittsburgh
National Institutes of Health
Institute for Precision Medicine University of Pittsburgh UPMC
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference39 articles.
1. Vorp, D. A. Biomechanics of abdominal aortic aneurysms. J. Biomech. 40, 1887–1902. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2006.09.003.BIOMECHANICS (2009).
2. Darling, R. C., Messina, C. R., Brewster, D. C. & Ottinger, L. W. Autopsy study of unoperated abdominal aortic aneurysms. The case for early resection. Circulation 56, 161–164 (1977).
3. Kontopodis, N., Pantidis, D., Dedes, A., Daskalakis, N. & Ioannou, C. V. The – Not So – Solid 5.5 cm threshold for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: Facts, misinterpretations, and future directions. Front. Surg. 3, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2016.00001 (2016).
4. Vorp, D. A. & Geest, J. P. V. Biomechanical determinants of abdominal aortic aneurysm rupture. Arterioscler. Thromb. Vasc. Biol. 25, 1558–1566. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.ATV.0000174129.77391.55 (2005).
5. Raghavan, M. L. & Vorp, D. A. Toward a biomechanical tool to evaluate rupture potential of abdominal aortic aneurysm: Identification of a finite strain constitutive model and evaluation of its applicability. J. Biomech. 33, 475–482. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-9290(99)00201-8 (2000).
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献