Machine learning algorithms to predict the risk of rupture of intracranial aneurysms: a systematic review

Karan Daga,Siddharth Agarwal,Zaeem Moti,Matthew BK Lee,Munaib Din,David Wood,Marc Modat,Thomas C Booth
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00062-024-01474-4
2024-12-06
Abstract:Purpose: Subarachnoid haemorrhage is a potentially fatal consequence of intracranial aneurysm rupture, however, it is difficult to predict if aneurysms will rupture. Prophylactic treatment of an intracranial aneurysm also involves risk, hence identifying rupture-prone aneurysms is of substantial clinical importance. This systematic review aims to evaluate the performance of machine learning algorithms for predicting intracranial aneurysm rupture risk. Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science were searched until December 2023. Studies incorporating any machine learning algorithm to predict the risk of rupture of an intracranial aneurysm were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST). PROSPERO registration: CRD42023452509. Results: Out of 10,307 records screened, 20 studies met the eligibility criteria for this review incorporating a total of 20,286 aneurysm cases. The machine learning models gave a 0.66-0.90 range for performance accuracy. The models were compared to current clinical standards in six studies and gave mixed results. Most studies posed high or unclear risks of bias and concerns for applicability, limiting the inferences that can be drawn from them. There was insufficient homogenous data for a meta-analysis. Conclusions: Machine learning can be applied to predict the risk of rupture for intracranial aneurysms. However, the evidence does not comprehensively demonstrate superiority to existing practice, limiting its role as a clinical adjunct. Further prospective multicentre studies of recent machine learning tools are needed to prove clinical validation before they are implemented in the clinic.
Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition,Machine Learning,Quantitative Methods
What problem does this paper attempt to address?
The problem that this paper attempts to solve is: How to use machine - learning algorithms to predict the rupture risk of intracranial aneurysms. Specifically, this study aims to evaluate the performance of existing machine - learning models in predicting the rupture risk of unruptured intracranial aneurysms (UIA) and explore whether these models can outperform the existing clinical standards. ### Problem Background Intracranial aneurysm is a potentially fatal disease, and its rupture may lead to subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH), which is life - threatening. However, it is very difficult to predict whether an aneurysm will rupture. Although preventive treatment can reduce the rupture risk, it also has certain risks itself. Therefore, accurately identifying aneurysms that are prone to rupture is crucial for clinical decision - making. ### Research Objectives The main objective of this systematic review is to evaluate the performance of machine - learning algorithms in predicting the rupture risk of intracranial aneurysms. Specific goals include: 1. **Evaluate the accuracy of existing machine - learning models**: Through systematic review and literature analysis, understand the performance of different machine - learning models in predicting aneurysm rupture risk. 2. **Compare machine - learning models with existing clinical standards**: Compare the prediction performance of machine - learning models with currently commonly used scoring systems (such as PHASES, UIATS, etc.) to evaluate their superiority. 3. **Explore the clinical application potential of machine - learning models**: Analyze the limitations of existing studies and the directions of future studies to provide guidance for the application of machine - learning models in clinical practice. ### Main Findings - **Model Performance**: Among the 20 included studies, the prediction accuracy of machine - learning models ranged from 0.66 to 0.90 (measured by ROC - AUC). Some studies showed that the performance of machine - learning models was better than the existing scoring systems, but in some cases it was still not as good as the clinical judgment of experts. - **Research Limitations**: Most studies had a high risk of bias or applicability problems, which limited the clinical application of their results. For example, only a few studies carried out external validation, and lacked clinical validation (i.e., testing the model in the clinical pathway). - **Future Directions**: More high - quality multi - center prospective studies are needed to verify the clinical effectiveness of machine - learning models and ensure their generalization ability in different populations. ### Conclusion Although machine - learning shows certain potential in predicting the rupture risk of intracranial aneurysms, the current evidence is not sufficient to prove that it is superior to the existing clinical standards. Future research should focus on improving the external validity and clinical validation of models to ensure their reliability and accuracy in actual clinical applications.