학술논문

Machine learning driven prediction of cerebrospinal fluid rhinorrhoea following endonasal skull base surgery: A multicentre prospective observational study
Document Type
article
Author
CRANIAL ConsortiumAdrito DasDanyal Z. KhanDanail StoyanovHani J. MarcusSoham BandyopadhyayBenjamin E. SchroederVikesh PatelAlice O’DonnellNeurology and Neurosurgery Interest GroupBritish Neurosurgical Trainee Research CollaborativeAnastasios GiamouriadisPragnesh BhattBhaskar RamAdithya VarmaPhilip WeirBrendan HannaTheodore C. HirstPatrick McAleaveyAlessandro PaluzziGeorgios TsermoulasShahzada AhmedWai Cheong SoonYasir Arafat ChowdhurySuhaib AbualsaudShumail MahmoodParesh NaikZohra HaiderkhanRafid Al-MahfoudhAndrea PereraMircea RusAdam WilliamsCharles HandKumar AbhinavCristina CerneiAiman DilnawazRichard MannionThomas SantariusJames TysomeRishi SharmaAngelos G. KoliasNeil DonnellyAshwin VenkateshCaroline HayhurstAmr MohamedBenjamin StewJoseph MerolaSetthasorn Zhi YangMahmoud KamelMohammad Habibullah KhanSahibzada AbrarChristopher MckeonDaniel McSweeneyMohsen JavadpourPeter LacyDaniel MurrayElena RomanKismet Hossain-IbrahimDavid BennettNathan McSorleyAdam HounatPatrick StathamMark HughesAlhafidz HamdanCaroline ScottJigi Moudgil-JoshiAnuj BahlAnna BjornsonDaniel GattNick PhillipsNeeraj KalraMelissa BautistaSeerat ShiraziCatherine E. GilkesChristopher P. MillwardAhmad MS. AliDimitris ParaskevopoulosJarnail BalSamir MatloobRhannon LoboNigel MendozaRamesh NairArthur DaltonAdarsh NadigLucas HernandezNick ThomasEleni MaratosJonathan ShapeySinan Al-BaraziAsfand Baig MirzaMohamed OkashaPrabhjot Singh MalhotraRazna AhmedNeil L. DorwardJoan GrieveParag SayalDavid ChoiIvan CabriloHugo Layard HorsfallJonathan PollockAlireza ShoakazemiOscar MaccormacGuru N K. AmirthalingamAndrew MartinSimon StapletonFlorence HoggDaniel RichardsonKanna GnanalinghamOmar PathmanabanDaniel M. FountainRaj BhallaCathal J. HannanAnnabel ChadwickAlistair JenkinsClaire NicholsonSyed ShumonMohamed YoussefCallum AllisonGraham DowIain RobertsonLaurence Johann GlanczMurugan SitaramanAshwin KumariaAnanyo BagchiSimon CudlipJane HallidayRory J. PiperAlexandros BoukasMeriem AmaroucheDamjan VeljanoskiSamiul MuquitEllie EdlmannHaritha MaripiYi WangMehnaz HossainAndrew AlaladeSyed MaroofPradnya PatkarSaurabh SinhaShowkat MirzDuncan HendersonMohammad Saud KhanNijaguna MathadJonathan HempenstallDifei WangPavan MarwahaSimon ShawGeorgios SolomouAlina Shrestha
Source
Frontiers in Oncology, Vol 13 (2023)
Subject
cerebrospinal fluid leak
cerebrospinal fluid rhinorrhoea
CSF
endoscopic endonasal
skull base surgery
machine learning - ML
Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens
RC254-282
Language
English
ISSN
2234-943X
Abstract
BackgroundCerebrospinal fluid rhinorrhoea (CSFR) is a common complication following endonasal skull base surgery, a technique that is fundamental to the treatment of pituitary adenomas and many other skull base tumours. The CRANIAL study explored CSFR incidence and related risk factors, particularly skull base repair techniques, via a multicentre prospective observational study. We sought to use machine learning to leverage this complex multicentre dataset for CSFR prediction and risk factor analysis.MethodsA dataset of 865 cases - 725 transsphenoidal approach (TSA) and 140 expanded endonasal approach (EEA) - with cerebrospinal fluid rhinorrhoea as the primary outcome, was used. Relevant variables were extracted from the data, and prediction variables were divided into two categories, preoperative risk factors; and repair techniques, with 6 and 11 variables respectively. Three types of machine learning models were developed in order to predict CSFR: logistic regression (LR); decision tree (DT); and neural network (NN). Models were validated using 5-fold cross-validation, compared via their area under the curve (AUC) evaluation metric, and key prediction variables were identified using their Shapley additive explanations (SHAP) score.ResultsCSFR rates were 3.9% (28/725) for the transsphenoidal approach and 7.1% (10/140) for the expanded endonasal approach. NNs outperformed LR and DT for CSFR prediction, with a mean AUC of 0.80 (0.70-0.90) for TSA and 0.78 (0.60-0.96) for EEA, when all risk factor and intraoperative repair data were integrated into the model. The presence of intraoperative CSF leak was the most prominent risk factor for CSFR. Elevated BMI and revision surgery were also associated with CSFR for the transsphenoidal approach. CSF diversion and gasket sealing appear to be strong predictors of the absence of CSFR for both approaches.ConclusionNeural networks are effective at predicting CSFR and uncovering key CSFR predictors in patients following endonasal skull base surgery, outperforming traditional statistical methods. These models will be improved further with larger and more granular datasets, improved NN architecture, and external validation. In the future, such predictive models could be used to assist surgical decision-making and support more individualised patient counselling.