ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2023
Machine Learning for Prediction of Technical Results of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Chronic Total Occlusion.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Applications of Artificial Intelligence in Chronic Total Occlusion Revascularization: From Present to Future-A Narrative Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Review
- Reimagining chronic total occlusion management interventions: the role of artificial intelligence in imaging, planning, and procedural guidance.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2025Review
- Procedural success prediction in chronic total occlusion percutaneous coronary intervention (CTO-PCI)-the rise of the machines?Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2024Article
- The development and validation of a prognostic prediction modeling study in acute myocardial infarction patients after percutaneous coronary intervention: hemorrhea and major cardiovascular adverse events.Journal of thoracic disease · 2024Article
- The Role of Coronary Imaging in Chronic Total Occlusions: Applications and Future Possibilities.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2024Review
- Special Issue "Clinical Frontiers in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention".Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
(1) Background: The probability of technical success in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for chronic total occlusion (CTO) represents essential information for specifying the priority of PCI for treatment selection in patients with CTO. However, the predictabilities of existing scores based on conventional regression analysis remain modest, leaving room for improvements in model discrimination. Recently, machine learning (ML) techniques have emerged as highly effective methods for prediction and decision-making in various disciplines. We therefore investigated the predictability of ML models for technical results of CTO-PCI and compared their performances to the results from existing scores, including J-CTO, CL, and CASTLE scores. (2) Methods: This analysis used data from the Japanese CTO-PCI expert registry, which enrolled 8760 consecutive patients undergoing CTO-PCI. The performance of prediction models was assessed using the area under the receiver operating curve (ROC-AUC). (3) Results: Technical success was achieved in 7990 procedures, accounting for an overall success rate of 91.2%. The best ML model, extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), outperformed the conventional prediction scores with ROC-AUC (XGBoost 0.760 [95% confidence interval {CI}: 0.740-0.780] vs. J-CTO 0.697 [95%CI: 0.675-0.719], CL 0.662 [95%CI: 0.639-0.684], CASTLE 0.659 [95%CI: 0.636-0.681];
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.