Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37875579›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2023

A machine learning approach to predict the glaucoma filtration surgery outcome.

Luca Agnifili, Michele Figus, Annamaria Porreca, Lorenza Brescia, Matteo Sacchi, Giuseppe Covello, Chiara Posarelli, Marta Di Nicola, Rodolfo Mastropasqua, Paolo Nucci and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Artificial intelligence in the anterior segment of eye diseases.International journal of ophthalmology · 2024
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Luca AgnifiliDepartment of Medicine and Ageing Science, Ophthalmology Clinic, University "G. D'Annunzio" of Chieti-Pescara, Via Dei Vestini, 66100, Chieti, CH, Italy. l.agnifili@unich.it.
Michele FigusOphthalmology Unit, Department of Surgical, Medical, Molecular Pathology and Critical Care Medicine, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
Annamaria PorrecaDepartment of Medical, Oral and Biotechnological Sciences, Laboratory of Biostatistics, University "G. d'Annunzio" Chieti-Pescara, Chieti, Italy. annamaria.porreca@unich.it.
Lorenza BresciaDepartment of Medicine and Ageing Science, Ophthalmology Clinic, University "G. D'Annunzio" of Chieti-Pescara, Via Dei Vestini, 66100, Chieti, CH, Italy.
Matteo SacchiUniversity Eye Clinic, San Giuseppe Hospital, IRCCS Multimedica, Milan, Italy.
Giuseppe CovelloOphthalmology Unit, Department of Surgical, Medical, Molecular Pathology and Critical Care Medicine, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
Chiara PosarelliOphthalmology Unit, Department of Surgical, Medical, Molecular Pathology and Critical Care Medicine, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
Marta Di NicolaDepartment of Medical, Oral and Biotechnological Sciences, Laboratory of Biostatistics, University "G. d'Annunzio" Chieti-Pescara, Chieti, Italy.
Rodolfo MastropasquaDepartment of Neuroscience, Imaging and Clinical Science, "G. d'Annunzio" University of Chieti-Pescara, Chieti, Italy.
Paolo NucciUniversity Eye Clinic, San Giuseppe Hospital, IRCCS Multimedica, Milan, Italy.
Leonardo MastropasquaDepartment of Medicine and Ageing Science, Ophthalmology Clinic, University "G. D'Annunzio" of Chieti-Pescara, Via Dei Vestini, 66100, Chieti, CH, Italy.
University of Chieti-Pescara · ITUniversity of Pisa · ITMultiMedica · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study aimed at predicting the filtration surgery (FS) outcome using a machine learning (ML) approach. 102 glaucomatous patients undergoing FS were enrolled and underwent ocular surface clinical tests (OSCTs), determination of surgical site-related biometric parameters (SSPs) and conjunctival vascularization. Break-up-time, Schirmer test I, corneal fluorescein staining, Meibomian gland expressibility; conjunctival hyperemia, upper bulbar conjunctiva area of exposure, limbus to superior eyelid distance; and conjunctival epithelial and stromal (CET, CST) thickness and reflectivity (ECR, SCR) at AS-OCT were considered. Successful FS required a 30% baseline intraocular pressure reduction, with values ≤ 18 mmHg with or without medications. The classification tree (CT) was the ML algorithm used to analyze data. At the twelfth month, FS was successful in 60.8% of cases, whereas failed in 39.2%. At the variable importance ranking, CST and SCR were the predictors with the greater relative importance to the CART tree construction, followed by age. CET and ECR showed less relative importance, whereas OSCTs and SSPs were not important features. Within the CT, CST turned out the most important variable for discriminating success from failure, followed by SCR and age, with cut-off values of 75 µm, 169 on gray scale, and 62 years, respectively. The ROC curve for the classifier showed an AUC of 0.784 (0.692-0.860). In this ML approach, CT analysis found that conjunctival stroma thickness and reflectivity, along with age, can predict the FS outcome with good accuracy. A pre-operative thick and hyper-reflective stroma, and a younger age increase the risk of FS failure.

Indexed as

Filtering SurgeryGlaucomaAnodontiaConjunctivaEccrine GlandsEyelid NeoplasmsFluoresceinHumansHypotrichosisKeratoderma, PalmoplantarMeibomian GlandsFluorescein

Identifiers

PMID37875579
PMCPMC10598019
OpenAlexW4387907254

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.