从激光准时到碎石持续时间:利用人工智能改进“肾结石计算器”对碎石持续时间的预测。

IF 2.8 2区 医学 Q2 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Frédéric Panthier, Laurent Berthe, Chady Ghnatios, Francisco Chinesta, Stessy Kutchukian, Steeve Doizi, François Audenet, Laurent Yonneau, Thierry Lebret, Marc-Olivier Timsit, Arnaud Mejean, Luigi Candela, Catalina Solano, Mariela Corrales, Marie Chicaud, Olivier Traxer, Daron Smith
{"title":"从激光准时到碎石持续时间:利用人工智能改进“肾结石计算器”对碎石持续时间的预测。","authors":"Frédéric Panthier, Laurent Berthe, Chady Ghnatios, Francisco Chinesta, Stessy Kutchukian, Steeve Doizi, François Audenet, Laurent Yonneau, Thierry Lebret, Marc-Olivier Timsit, Arnaud Mejean, Luigi Candela, Catalina Solano, Mariela Corrales, Marie Chicaud, Olivier Traxer, Daron Smith","doi":"10.1007/s00345-025-05771-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>\"Kidney Stone Calculator\" (KSC) helps to plan flexible ureteroscopy, providing the stone volume (SV) and an estimated duration of laser lithotripsy (eLD). eLD is calculated from in vitro ablation rates and SV. KSC's accuracy has been demonstrated with a mean difference between eLD and effective LD (EfLD) of 18.8%. We aimed to reduce the eLD-efLD difference using Machine Learning (ML).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From the prospective multicenter KSC database, demographic and peri-operative data were anonymously extracted: SV, stone location, maximum density, anatomy, surgical expertise, ureteral access sheath, basket use, laser source, fiber diameter and settings, eLD and efLD. After normalization and splitting (training (80%), test (20%)), significant variables influencing the difference between eLD and efLD were selected through multiple linear regression (MLR). Six types of ML models were subsequently evaluated to minimize the mean absolute error (MAE) between eLD and efLD on the test group.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>125 patients were included. After normalization and MLR, MAE were significantly influenced by 14 variables (including diverticulum location, surgical expertise, laser sources, laser fiber diameters, 5 Hz frequency, 1.5 J pulse energy and eLD). eLD had the greatest positive impact on the eLD-efLD difference (2.45 (2.16-2.73), p < 0.0001)). Above the various tested ML models, the Bayesian \"Automatic-Relevance-Determination\" and Dense Neural Networks respectively presented the lowest and highest MAE on the test group (3.9% and 6.8%). Results did not differ among models overall (p = 0.93) and two by two.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The difference between KSC's eLD and efLD can be five-fold reduced using ML and Artificial Intelligence, including clinically impactful factors such as the surgical technique or expertise. A clinical inference could help to externally validate our findings.</p>","PeriodicalId":23954,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Urology","volume":"43 1","pages":"396"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"From laser-on time to lithotripsy duration: improving the prediction of lithotripsy duration with 'Kidney Stone Calculator' using artificial intelligence.\",\"authors\":\"Frédéric Panthier, Laurent Berthe, Chady Ghnatios, Francisco Chinesta, Stessy Kutchukian, Steeve Doizi, François Audenet, Laurent Yonneau, Thierry Lebret, Marc-Olivier Timsit, Arnaud Mejean, Luigi Candela, Catalina Solano, Mariela Corrales, Marie Chicaud, Olivier Traxer, Daron Smith\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00345-025-05771-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>\\\"Kidney Stone Calculator\\\" (KSC) helps to plan flexible ureteroscopy, providing the stone volume (SV) and an estimated duration of laser lithotripsy (eLD). eLD is calculated from in vitro ablation rates and SV. KSC's accuracy has been demonstrated with a mean difference between eLD and effective LD (EfLD) of 18.8%. We aimed to reduce the eLD-efLD difference using Machine Learning (ML).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From the prospective multicenter KSC database, demographic and peri-operative data were anonymously extracted: SV, stone location, maximum density, anatomy, surgical expertise, ureteral access sheath, basket use, laser source, fiber diameter and settings, eLD and efLD. After normalization and splitting (training (80%), test (20%)), significant variables influencing the difference between eLD and efLD were selected through multiple linear regression (MLR). Six types of ML models were subsequently evaluated to minimize the mean absolute error (MAE) between eLD and efLD on the test group.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>125 patients were included. After normalization and MLR, MAE were significantly influenced by 14 variables (including diverticulum location, surgical expertise, laser sources, laser fiber diameters, 5 Hz frequency, 1.5 J pulse energy and eLD). eLD had the greatest positive impact on the eLD-efLD difference (2.45 (2.16-2.73), p < 0.0001)). Above the various tested ML models, the Bayesian \\\"Automatic-Relevance-Determination\\\" and Dense Neural Networks respectively presented the lowest and highest MAE on the test group (3.9% and 6.8%). Results did not differ among models overall (p = 0.93) and two by two.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The difference between KSC's eLD and efLD can be five-fold reduced using ML and Artificial Intelligence, including clinically impactful factors such as the surgical technique or expertise. A clinical inference could help to externally validate our findings.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23954,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"World Journal of Urology\",\"volume\":\"43 1\",\"pages\":\"396\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"World Journal of Urology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-025-05771-6\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Urology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-025-05771-6","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导读:“肾结石计算器”(KSC)有助于规划柔性输尿管镜检查,提供结石体积(SV)和激光碎石(eLD)的估计持续时间。eLD是根据体外消融率和SV计算的。KSC的准确度与有效LD (EfLD)的平均差值为18.8%。我们的目标是使用机器学习(ML)减少eLD-efLD差异。方法:从前瞻性多中心KSC数据库中匿名提取人口统计学和围手术期数据:SV,结石位置,最大密度,解剖,手术专业知识,输尿管通路鞘,篮使用,激光源,纤维直径和设置,eLD和efLD。经过归一化和分割(训练(80%),检验(20%)),通过多元线性回归(MLR)选择影响eLD与efLD差异的显著变量。随后对六种ML模型进行评估,以最小化试验组eLD和efLD之间的平均绝对误差(MAE)。结果:纳入125例患者。归一化和MLR后,MAE受憩室位置、手术技术、激光源、激光纤维直径、5 Hz频率、1.5 J脉冲能量和eLD等14个变量的显著影响。eLD对eLD-efLD差异的积极影响最大(2.45 (2.16-2.73))p结论:使用ML和人工智能,包括手术技术或专业知识等临床影响因素,KSC eLD和efLD之间的差异可以减少五分之一。临床推断可能有助于从外部验证我们的发现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
From laser-on time to lithotripsy duration: improving the prediction of lithotripsy duration with 'Kidney Stone Calculator' using artificial intelligence.

Introduction: "Kidney Stone Calculator" (KSC) helps to plan flexible ureteroscopy, providing the stone volume (SV) and an estimated duration of laser lithotripsy (eLD). eLD is calculated from in vitro ablation rates and SV. KSC's accuracy has been demonstrated with a mean difference between eLD and effective LD (EfLD) of 18.8%. We aimed to reduce the eLD-efLD difference using Machine Learning (ML).

Methods: From the prospective multicenter KSC database, demographic and peri-operative data were anonymously extracted: SV, stone location, maximum density, anatomy, surgical expertise, ureteral access sheath, basket use, laser source, fiber diameter and settings, eLD and efLD. After normalization and splitting (training (80%), test (20%)), significant variables influencing the difference between eLD and efLD were selected through multiple linear regression (MLR). Six types of ML models were subsequently evaluated to minimize the mean absolute error (MAE) between eLD and efLD on the test group.

Results: 125 patients were included. After normalization and MLR, MAE were significantly influenced by 14 variables (including diverticulum location, surgical expertise, laser sources, laser fiber diameters, 5 Hz frequency, 1.5 J pulse energy and eLD). eLD had the greatest positive impact on the eLD-efLD difference (2.45 (2.16-2.73), p < 0.0001)). Above the various tested ML models, the Bayesian "Automatic-Relevance-Determination" and Dense Neural Networks respectively presented the lowest and highest MAE on the test group (3.9% and 6.8%). Results did not differ among models overall (p = 0.93) and two by two.

Conclusion: The difference between KSC's eLD and efLD can be five-fold reduced using ML and Artificial Intelligence, including clinically impactful factors such as the surgical technique or expertise. A clinical inference could help to externally validate our findings.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
World Journal of Urology
World Journal of Urology 医学-泌尿学与肾脏学
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
8.80%
发文量
317
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The WORLD JOURNAL OF UROLOGY conveys regularly the essential results of urological research and their practical and clinical relevance to a broad audience of urologists in research and clinical practice. In order to guarantee a balanced program, articles are published to reflect the developments in all fields of urology on an internationally advanced level. Each issue treats a main topic in review articles of invited international experts. Free papers are unrelated articles to the main topic.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信