Can we improve the prediction of stone-free status after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for ureteral stones? A neural network or a statistical model?
- PMID: 15201765
- DOI: 10.1097/01.ju.0000128646.20349.27
Can we improve the prediction of stone-free status after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for ureteral stones? A neural network or a statistical model?
Abstract
Purpose: We evaluated whether an artificial neural network (ANN) can improve the prediction of stone-free status after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) (Dornier Medical Systems, Inc., Marietta, Georgia) for ureteral stones compared to a logistic regression (LR) model.
Materials and methods: Between February 1989 and December 1998, 984 patients with ureteral stones, including 780 males and 204 females with a mean age +/- SD of 40.85 +/- 10.33 years, were treated with ESWL. Stone-free status at 3 months was determined by urinary tract plain x-ray and excretory urography. Of all patients 919 (93.3%) were free of stones. The impact of 10 factors on stone-free status was studied using an LR model and ANN. These factors were patient age and sex, renal anatomy, stone location, side, number, length and width, whether stones were de novo or recurrent, and stent use. An LR model was constructed and ANN was trained on 688 randomly selected patients (70%) to predict stone-free status at 3 months. The 10 factors were used as covariates in the LR model and as input parameters to ANN. Performance of the trained net and developed logistic model was evaluated in the remaining 296 patients (30%), who served as the test set. The sensitivity (percent of correctly predicted stone-free cases), specificity (percent of correctly predicted nonstonefree cases), positive predictive value, overall accuracy and average classification rate of the 2 techniques were compared. Relevant variables influencing the construction of the 2 models were compared.
Results: Evaluating the performance of the LR and ANN models on the test set revealed a sensitivity of 100% and 77.9%, a specificity of 0.0% and 75%, a positive predictive value of 93.2% and 97.2%, an overall accuracy of 93.2% and 77.7%, and an average classification rate of 50% and 76.5%, respectively. LR failed to predict any nonstone free cases. LR and ANN identified stone location and stent use as important factors in determining the outcome, while ANN also identified stone length and width as influential factors.
Conclusions: ANN and LR could predict adequately those who would be stone-free after ESWL for ureteral stones. The neural network has a higher ability to predict those who fail to respond to ESWL.
Similar articles
-
Prediction of success rate after extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy of renal stones--a multivariate analysis model.Scand J Urol Nephrol. 2004;38(2):161-7. doi: 10.1080/00365590310022626. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 2004. PMID: 15204407
-
Prognostic factors for extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy of ureteric stones--a multivariate analysis study.Scand J Urol Nephrol. 2003;37(5):413-8. doi: 10.1080/00365590310006255. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 2003. PMID: 14594691
-
Preoperative nomograms for predicting stone-free rate after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy.J Urol. 2006 Oct;176(4 Pt 1):1453-6; discussion 1456-7. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2006.06.089. J Urol. 2006. PMID: 16952658
-
Extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy of middle ureteral stones: are ureteral stents necessary?Urology. 1995 Nov;46(5):649-52. doi: 10.1016/S0090-4295(99)80294-5. Urology. 1995. PMID: 7495114 Review.
-
Limitations of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy.Curr Opin Urol. 2007 Mar;17(2):109-13. doi: 10.1097/MOU.0b013e32802b70bc. Curr Opin Urol. 2007. PMID: 17285020 Review.
Cited by
-
Is shock wave lithotripsy efficient for the elderly stone formers? Results of a matched-pair analysis.Urol Res. 2012 Aug;40(4):299-304. doi: 10.1007/s00240-011-0424-4. Epub 2011 Sep 8. Urol Res. 2012. PMID: 21901557
-
Transforming urinary stone disease management by artificial intelligence-based methods: A comprehensive review.Asian J Urol. 2023 Jul;10(3):258-274. doi: 10.1016/j.ajur.2023.02.002. Epub 2023 May 2. Asian J Urol. 2023. PMID: 37538159 Free PMC article. Review.
-
The Ascent of Artificial Intelligence in Endourology: a Systematic Review Over the Last 2 Decades.Curr Urol Rep. 2021 Oct 9;22(10):53. doi: 10.1007/s11934-021-01069-3. Curr Urol Rep. 2021. PMID: 34626246 Free PMC article.
-
Current state of AI for shockwave lithotripsy: a systematic review from YAU and EAU endourology.World J Urol. 2025 Jul 11;43(1):429. doi: 10.1007/s00345-025-05830-y. World J Urol. 2025. PMID: 40643681 Review.
-
Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy of lower ureteric stones: Outcome and criteria for success.Arab J Urol. 2011 Mar;9(1):35-9. doi: 10.1016/j.aju.2011.03.010. Epub 2011 May 6. Arab J Urol. 2011. PMID: 26579265 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources