June 2021
Volume 62, Issue 8
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2021
Evaluation of machine learning algorithms for prediction of trabeculectomy outcomes
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Ahmed Amer Zanabli
    West Virginia University School of Medicine, Morgantown, West Virginia, United States
  • Hasan Ul Banna
    West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia, United States
  • Brian McMillan
    West Virginia University Eye Institute, Morgantown, West Virginia, United States
  • Maria Lehmann
    West Virginia University Eye Institute, Morgantown, West Virginia, United States
  • Sumeet Gupta
    West Virginia University Eye Institute, Morgantown, West Virginia, United States
  • Joel R Palko
    West Virginia University Eye Institute, Morgantown, West Virginia, United States
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Ahmed Zanabli, None; Hasan Ul Banna, None; Brian McMillan, None; Maria Lehmann, None; Sumeet Gupta, None; Joel Palko, None
  • Footnotes
    Support  None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2021, Vol.62, 997. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Ahmed Amer Zanabli, Hasan Ul Banna, Brian McMillan, Maria Lehmann, Sumeet Gupta, Joel R Palko; Evaluation of machine learning algorithms for prediction of trabeculectomy outcomes. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2021;62(8):997.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : To utilize pre-operative patient features obtained from electronic medical records to assess the accuracy of machine learning (ML) algorithms to predict trabeculectomy outcomes.

Methods : Demographic, ocular and systemic health data resulting in 40 features from 220 consecutive trabeculectomy operations on 175 patients were input into four machine learning algorithms. The primary outcome classification was surgical failure at 1 year, defined as IOP > 21 or <5 at two consecutive visits after 3 months, less than a 20% IOP reduction, or a need for reoperation for glaucoma. Eyes that had not failed by the above criteria and were not receiving supplemental medical therapy to lower IOP were considered a complete success and the remaining eyes considered failures. Up-sampling was carried out to equalize the frequency of the underrepresented class. Random forest (RF), artificial neural network (ANN), logistic regression (LR) and support vector machine (SVM) algorithms were evaluated using accuracy, sensitivity, specificity and area under the curve (AUC) metrics with 10-fold nested cross-validation. The model with the best performance was further optimized using recursive feature elimination and hyper-parameter tuning. The data set was divided using 60% training/validation and 40% testing for evaluation of the final optimized model. The features most influencing the accuracy of each algorithm were identified using mean decrease in accuracy (MDA).

Results : 123 (55.90%) of the operations were classified as surgical failures and 97 (44.10%) as complete successes. The accuracy and AUC were highest in the RF algorithm, followed by SVM, LR and ANN as seen in Table 1. The accuracy and AUC of the final optimized RF model were 0.65 and 0.70, respectively. The most influential features on the accuracy of the final RF model are shown in Fig 1.

Conclusions : To our knowledge, this is the first study to leverage the use of machine learning algorithms to predict trabeculectomy outcomes. The four ML algorithms performed similarly, with the RF algorithm providing moderately higher accuracy and AUC. Future work will focus on combining trabeculectomy outcomes from other institutions to increase sample size and provide more generalized predictive algorithms.

This is a 2021 ARVO Annual Meeting abstract.

 

Table 1: Comparison of the predictive performance of the four ML algorithms evaluated.

Table 1: Comparison of the predictive performance of the four ML algorithms evaluated.

 

Figure 1: Importance of top clinical predictors based on MDA (permutation importance).

Figure 1: Importance of top clinical predictors based on MDA (permutation importance).

×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×