Development and validation of explainable machine learning models for risk of mortality in transcatheter aortic valve implantation: TAVI risk machine scores

Harnessing the power of artificial intelligence in predicting all-cause mortality in transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objectives

In recent years, the use of artificial intelligence (AI) models to generate individualised risk assessments and predict patient outcomes post-Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI) has been a topic of increasing relevance in literature. This study aims to evaluate the predictive accuracy of AI algorithms in forecasting post-TAVI mortality as compared to traditional risk scores.

Methods

Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses for Systematic Reviews (PRISMA) standard, a systematic review was carried out. We searched four databases in total-PubMed, Medline, Embase, and Cochrane-from 19 June 2023-24 June, 2023.

Results

From 2,239 identified records, 1,504 duplicates were removed, 735 manuscripts were screened, and 10 studies were included in our review. Our pooled analysis of 5 studies and 9,398 patients revealed a significantly higher mean area under curve (AUC) associated with AI mortality predictions than traditional score predictions (MD: -0.16, CI: -0.22 to -0.10, p < 0.00001). Subgroup analyses of 30-day mortality (MD: -0.08, CI: -0.13 to -0.03, p = 0.001) and 1-year mortality (MD: -0.18, CI: -0.27 to -0.10, p < 0.0001) also showed significantly higher mean AUC with AI predictions than traditional score predictions. Pooled mean AUC of all 10 studies and 22,933 patients was 0.79 [0.73, 0.85].

Conclusion

AI models have a higher predictive accuracy as compared to traditional risk scores in predicting post-TAVI mortality. Overall, this review demonstrates the potential of AI in achieving personalised risk assessment in TAVI patients.

Registration and protocol

This systematic review and meta-analysis was registered under the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), under the registration name "All-Cause Mortality in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Assessed by Artificial Intelligence" and registration number CRD42023437705. A review protocol was not prepared. There were no amendments to the information provided at registration.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/, PROSPERO (CRD42023437705).

Machine-learning approaches for risk prediction in transcatheter aortic valve implantation: Systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

With the expanding integration of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) into the structural heart domain, numerous ML models have emerged for the prediction of adverse outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). We aim to identify, describe, and critically appraise ML prediction models for adverse outcomes after TAVI. Key objectives consisted in summarizing model performance, evaluating adherence to reporting guidelines, and transparency.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, SCOPUS, and Embase through August 2023. We selected published machine learning models predicting TAVI outcomes. Two reviewers independently screened articles, extracted data, and assessed the study quality according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Outcomes included summary C-statistics and model risk of bias assessed with the Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. C-statistics were pooled using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies (118,153 patients) employing various ML algorithms (76 models) were included in the systematic review. Predictive ability of models varied: 11.8% inadequate (C-statistic <0.60), 26.3% adequate (C-statistic 0.60-0.70), 31.6% acceptable (C-statistic 0.70-0.80), and 30.3% demonstrated excellent (C-statistic >0.80) performance. Meta-analyses revealed excellent predictive performance for early mortality (C-statistic: 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.65-0.91), acceptable performance for 1-year mortality (C-statistic: 0.76; 95% CI, 0.67-0.84), and acceptable performance for predicting permanent pacemaker implantation (C-statistic: 0.75; 95% CI, 0.51-0.90).

CONCLUSIONS

ML models for TAVI outcomes exhibit adequate-to-excellent performance, suggesting potential clinical utility. We identified concerns in methodology and transparency, emphasizing the need for improved scientific reporting standards.