BMC Urology (Jul 2020)

Machine learning prediction of stone-free success in patients with urinary stone after treatment of shock wave lithotripsy

  • Seung Woo Yang,
  • Yun Kyong Hyon,
  • Hyun Seok Na,
  • Long Jin,
  • Jae Geun Lee,
  • Jong Mok Park,
  • Ji Yong Lee,
  • Ju Hyun Shin,
  • Jae Sung Lim,
  • Yong Gil Na,
  • Kiwan Jeon,
  • Taeyoung Ha,
  • Jinbum Kim,
  • Ki Hak Song

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-020-00662-x
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 20, no. 1
pp. 1 – 8

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background The aims of this study were to determine the predictive value of decision support analysis for the shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) success rate and to analyze the data obtained from patients who underwent SWL to assess the factors influencing the outcome by using machine learning methods. Methods We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 358 patients who underwent SWL for urinary stone (kidney and upper-ureter stone) between 2015 and 2018 and evaluated the possible prognostic features, including patient population characteristics, urinary stone characteristics on a non-contrast, computed tomographic image. We performed 80% training set and 20% test set for the predictions of success and mainly used decision tree-based machine learning algorithms, such as random forest (RF), extreme gradient boosting trees (XGBoost), and light gradient boosting method (LightGBM). Results In machine learning analysis, the prediction accuracies for stone-free were 86.0, 87.5, and 87.9%, and those for one-session success were 78.0, 77.4, and 77.0% using RF, XGBoost, and LightGBM, respectively. In predictions for stone-free, LightGBM yielded the best accuracy and RF yielded the best one in those for one-session success among those methods. The sensitivity and specificity values for machine learning analytics are (0.74 to 0.78 and 0.92 to 0.93) for stone-free and (0.79 to 0.81 and 0.74 to 0.75) for one-session success, respectively. The area under curve (AUC) values for machine learning analytics are (0.84 to 0.85) for stone-free and (0.77 to 0.78) for one-session success and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) are (0.730 to 0.933) and (0.673 to 0.866) in average of methods, respectively. Conclusions We applied a selected machine learning analysis to predict the result after treatment of SWL for urinary stone. About 88% accurate machine learning based predictive model was evaluated. The importance of machine learning algorithm can give matched insights to domain knowledge on effective and influential factors for SWL success outcomes.

Keywords