Machine Learning to Delineate Surgeon and Clinical Factors That Anticipate Positive Surgical Margins After Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy

被引:7
|
作者
Lee, Ryan S. [1 ]
Ma, Runzhuo [1 ]
Pham, Stephanie [1 ]
Maya-Silva, Jacqueline [1 ]
Nguyen, Jessica H. [1 ]
Aron, Manju [2 ]
Cen, Steven [3 ]
Daneshmand, Siamak [4 ]
Hung, Andrew J. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Southern Calif, Ctr Robot Simulat & Educ, Keck Sch Med USC, Catherine & Joseph Aresty Dept Urol, 1441 Eastlake Ave,Suite 7416, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
[2] Univ Southern Calif, Keck Sch Med USC, Dept Pathol, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
[3] Univ Southern Calif, Keck Sch Med USC, Dept Radiol, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
[4] Univ Southern Calif, Keck Sch Med USC, Catherine & Joseph Aresty Dept Urol, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
prostate cancer; machine learning; automated performance metrics; IMPACT; PERFORMANCE; EXPERIENCE; RISK;
D O I
10.1089/end.2021.0890
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Purpose: Automated performance metrics (APMs), derived from instrument kinematic and systems events data during robotic surgery, are validated objective measures of surgeon performance. Our previous studies showed that APMs are strong outcome predictors of urinary continence after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). We now use machine learning to investigate how surgeon performance (i.e., APMs) and clinical factors can predict positive surgical margins (PSMs) after RARP.Methods: We prospectively collected data of patients undergoing RARP at our institution from 2016 to 2019. Random Forest model predicted PSMs based on 15 clinical factors and 38 APMs from 11 standardized RARP steps. Out-of-bag Gini impurity index determined the top 10 variables of importance (VOI). APMs in the top 10 VOI were assessed for confounding effects by extracapsular extension (ECE) and pathologic T (pT) through Poisson regression with Generalized Estimating Equation.Results: 55/236 (23.3%) cases had PSMs. Of the 55 cases with PSMs, 9 (16.4%) were pT2 and 46 (83.6%), pT3. The full model, including clinical factors and APMs, achieved area under the curve (AUC) 0.74. When assessing clinical factors or APMs alone, the model achieved AUC 0.72 and 0.64, respectively. The strongest PSM predictors were ECE and pT stage, followed by APMs in specific steps. After adjusting for ECE and pT stage, most APMs remained as independent predictors of PSM.Conclusion: Using machine learning methods, we found that the strongest predictors of PSMs after RARP are nonmodifiable, disease-driven factors (ECE and pT). While APMs provide minimal additional insight into when PSMs may occur, they are nonetheless capable of independently predicting PSMs based on objective measures of surgeon performance.
引用
收藏
页码:1192 / 1198
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] MACHINE LEARNING AND AUTOMATED PERFORMANCE METRICS TO PREDICT POSITIVE SURGICAL MARGINS AFTER ROBOT-ASSISTED RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY
    Lee, Ryan S.
    Ma, Runzhuo
    Nguyen, Jessica H.
    Pham, Stephanie
    Maya-Silva, Jacqueline
    Aron, Manju
    Daneshmand, Siamak
    Cen, Steven
    Hung, Andrew J.
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2021, 206 : E267 - E267
  • [2] Predictive Factors for Positive Surgical Margins and Their Locations After Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy
    Coelho, Rafael F.
    Chauhan, Sanket
    Orvieto, Marcelo A.
    Palmer, Kenneth J.
    Rocco, Bernardo
    Patel, Vipul R.
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2010, 57 (06) : 1022 - 1029
  • [3] Predictors for positive surgical margins after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: A single surgeon's series in Japan
    Hashimoto, Takeshi
    Yoshioka, Kunihiko
    Gondo, Tatsuo
    Takeuchi, Hisashi
    Nakagami, Yoshihiro
    Nakashima, Jun
    Tachibana, Masaaki
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2013, 20 (09) : 873 - 878
  • [4] Predictors of positive surgical margins at open and robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: A single surgeon series
    Weerakoon M.
    Sengupta S.
    Sethi K.
    Ischia J.
    Webb D.R.
    Journal of Robotic Surgery, 2012, 6 (4) : 311 - 316
  • [5] Management of positive surgical margins after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: Single institution experience
    Pang, See-Tong
    Lin, Po-Hung
    Chuang, Cheng-Keng
    Chang, Ying-Hsu
    Liu, Chung-Yi
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2016, 23 : 71 - 72
  • [6] Editorial Comment to Predictors for positive surgical margins after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: A single surgeon's series in Japan
    Koutlidis, Nicolas
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2013, 20 (09) : 879 - 879
  • [7] High surgeon volume and positive surgical margins can predict the risk of biochemical recurrence after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy
    Porcaro, Antonio Benito
    Tafuri, Alessandro
    Sebben, Marco
    Amigoni, Nelia
    Processali, Tania
    Pirozzi, Marco
    Rizzetto, Riccardo
    Shakir, Aliasger
    Corsi, Paolo
    Tiso, Leone
    Cerrato, Clara
    Migliorini, Filippo
    Novella, Giovanni
    Brunelli, Matteo
    Bernasconi, Riccardo
    De Marco, Vincenzo
    Siracusano, Salvatore
    Artibani, Walter
    THERAPEUTIC ADVANCES IN UROLOGY, 2019, 11
  • [8] Which surgical margins truly matter? Identifying clinically relevant positive surgical margins after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy
    Veerman, H.
    Meijer, D.
    Van Leeuwen, P. J.
    Vis, A. N.
    Van der Poel, H. G.
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2021, 79 : S1713 - S1714
  • [9] The impact of 3D models on positive surgical margins after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy
    Checcucci, Enrico
    Pecoraro, Angela
    Amparore, Daniele
    De Cillis, Sabrina
    Granato, Stefano
    Volpi, Gabriele
    Sica, Michele
    Verri, Paolo
    Piana, Alberto
    Piazzolla, Pietro
    Manfredi, Matteo
    Vezzetti, Enrico
    Di Dio, Michele
    Fiori, Cristian
    Porpiglia, Francesco
    Urology, Uro-technology And Some Working Group Of The Young Academic Urologists Working Party Of The European Association Of
    WORLD JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2022, 40 (09) : 2221 - 2229
  • [10] The impact of 3D models on positive surgical margins after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy
    Enrico Checcucci
    Angela Pecoraro
    Daniele Amparore
    Sabrina De Cillis
    Stefano Granato
    Gabriele Volpi
    Michele Sica
    Paolo Verri
    Alberto Piana
    Pietro Piazzolla
    Matteo Manfredi
    Enrico Vezzetti
    Michele Di Dio
    Cristian Fiori
    Francesco Porpiglia
    World Journal of Urology, 2022, 40 : 2221 - 2229