ArticleAnnals of biomedical engineering2020
A Comparative Classification Analysis of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms by Machine Learning Algorithms.
Article in Annals of biomedical engineering, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Optimizing predictive performance without sacrificing explainability: Comparing logistic regression and ensemble decision trees for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair outcomes.JVS-vascular insights · 2026Article
- Simulation-Based Training in Aortic Aneurysm Surgery: Toward a New Educational Standard.Cureus · 2025Review
- Abdominal aortic aneurysm classification based on dynamic intraluminal thrombus analysis during cardiac cycle.Journal of vascular surgery cases and innovative techniques · 2025Article
- Modeling Techniques and Boundary Conditions in Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Analysis: Latest Developments in Simulation and Integration of Machine Learning and Data-Driven Approaches.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Temporal geometric mapping defines morphoelastic growth model of Type B aortic dissection evolution.Computers in biology and medicine · 2024Article
- Review of Machine Learning Techniques in Soft Tissue Biomechanics and Biomaterials.Cardiovascular engineering and technology · 2024Review
- An artificial intelligence based abdominal aortic aneurysm prognosis classifier to predict patient outcomes.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Machine learning model predicts the occurrence of acute kidney injury after open surgery for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.Zhong nan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Central South University. Medical sciences · 2023Article
- Assessment of shape-based features ability to predict the ascending aortic aneurysm growth.Frontiers in physiology · 2023Article
- The Association Between Curvature and Rupture in a Murine Model of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm and Dissection.Experimental mechanics · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The objective of this work was to perform image-based classification of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) based on their demographic, geometric, and biomechanical attributes. We retrospectively reviewed existing demographics and abdominal computed tomography angiography images of 100 asymptomatic and 50 symptomatic AAA patients who received an elective or emergent repair, respectively, within 1-6 months of their last follow up. An in-house script developed within the MATLAB computational platform was used to segment the clinical images, calculate 53 descriptors of AAA geometry, and generate volume meshes suitable for finite element analysis (FEA). Using a third party FEA solver, four biomechanical markers were calculated from the wall stress distributions. Eight machine learning algorithms (MLA) were used to develop classification models based on the discriminatory potential of the demographic, geometric, and biomechanical variables. The overall classification performance of the algorithms was assessed by the accuracy, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, and precision of their predictions. The generalized additive model (GAM) was found to have the highest accuracy (87%), AUC (89%), and sensitivity (78%), and the third highest specificity (92%), in classifying the individual AAA as either asymptomatic or symptomatic. The k-nearest neighbor classifier yielded the highest specificity (96%). GAM used seven markers (six geometric and one biomechanical) to develop the classifier. The maximum transverse dimension, the average wall thickness at the maximum diameter, and the spatially averaged wall stress were found to be the most influential markers in the classification analysis. A second classification analysis revealed that using maximum diameter alone results in a lower accuracy (79%) than using GAM with seven geometric and biomechanical markers. We infer from these results that biomechanical and geometric measures by themselves are not sufficient to discriminate adequately between population samples of asymptomatic and symptomatic AAA, whereas MLA offer a statistical approach to stratification of rupture risk by combining demographic, geometric, and biomechanical attributes of patient-specific AAA.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.