Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38775943›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of urology2024

A machine learning approach using stone volume to predict stone-free status at ureteroscopy.

Ganesh Vigneswaran, Ren Teh, Francesco Ripa, Amelia Pietropaolo, Sachin Modi, Jagmohan Chauhan, Bhaskar Kumar Somani

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of urology, 2024. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Ganesh Vigneswaran *Department of Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Southampton, Southampton, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4115-428X
Ren Teh *Department of Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Francesco RipaDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Southampton, Tremona Road, Southampton, UK.
Amelia PietropaoloDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Southampton, Tremona Road, Southampton, UK.
Sachin ModiDepartment of Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Southampton, Southampton, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0813-3791
Jagmohan ChauhanElectronics and Computer Science, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Bhaskar Kumar SomaniDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Southampton, Tremona Road, Southampton, UK. bhaskarsomani@yahoo.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6248-6478

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionTo develop a predictive model incorporating stone volume along with other clinical and radiological factors to predict stone-free (SF) status at ureteroscopy (URS). MATERIAL AND

methodsRetrospective analysis of patients undergoing URS for kidney stone disease at our institution from 2012 to 2021. SF status was defined as stone fragments < 2 mm at the end of the procedure confirmed endoscopically and no evidence of stone fragments > 2 mm at XR KUB or US KUB at 3 months follow up. We specifically included all non-SF patients to optimise our algorithm for identifying instances with residual stone burden. SF patients were also randomly sampled over the same time period to ensure a more balanced dataset for ML prediction. Stone volumes were measured using preprocedural CT and combined with 19 other clinical and radiological factors. A bagged trees machine learning model with cross-validation was used for this analysis.

results330 patients were included (SF: n = 276, not SF: n = 54, mean age 59.5 ± 16.1 years). A fivefold cross validated RUSboosted trees model has an accuracy of 74.5% and AUC of 0.82. The model sensitivity and specificity were 75% and 72.2% respectively. Variable importance analysis identified total stone volume (17.7% of total importance), operation time (14.3%), age (12.9%) and stone composition (10.9%) as important factors in predicting non-SF patients. Single and cumulative stone size which are commonly used in current practice to guide management, only represented 9.4% and 4.7% of total importance, respectively.

conclusionMachine learning can be used to predict patients that will be SF at the time of URS. Total stone volume appears to be more important than stone size in predicting SF status. Our findings could be used to optimise patient counselling and highlight an increasing role of stone volume to guide endourological practice and future guidelines.

Indexed as

Kidney CalculiMachine LearningUreteroscopyAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsRetrospective StudiesAIKidney calculiMachine learningStone volumeUreteroscopy

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.