Coronary disease & ACSSecondary analysis

Can Machine Learning Aid the Selection of Percutaneous vs Surgical Revascularization?

J Am Coll CardiolPublished

  • Secondary analysis of the SYNTAX randomised trial with external validation (prognostic model development)
  • machine learning
  • cross-validation
  • external validation in CREDO-Kyoto registry

Authors' conclusion

An ML-based approach for identifying individuals who benefit from CABG or PCI is feasible and effective.

Study context

Population
Patients with 3-vessel and/or left main coronary artery disease (CAD) (SYNTAX trial; CREDO-Kyoto registry)SYNTAX n = 1,800
Comparison
Machine learning (ML) models (Lasso regression, gradient boosting) vs SSII-2020 for predicting 5-year death and treatment benefit of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) vs percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)
Primary endpoint
Discrimination (C-index) for 5-year all-cause death and treatment benefit between PCI and CABG
Follow-up
5 years

Primary result

As reported in the abstract

5-year all-cause death (C-index)
GroupC-index, cross-validationC-index, external validation
Hybrid gradient boosting0.78 (95% CI: 0.75-0.81)0.77 (95% CI: 0.76-0.79)

Further findings

Treatment benefit of CABG vs PCI

ML models identified heterogeneity in the treatment benefit of CABG vs PCI

Original publication

Can Machine Learning Aid the Selection of Percutaneous vs Surgical Revascularization? J Am Coll Cardiol. Published 28 November 2023. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2023.09.818

Summarised from the published abstract; every number is checked against it