Vše

Co hledáte?

Vše
Projekty
Výsledky výzkumu
Subjekty

Rychlé hledání

  • Projekty podpořené TA ČR
  • Významné projekty
  • Projekty s nejvyšší státní podporou
  • Aktuálně běžící projekty

Chytré vyhledávání

  • Takto najdu konkrétní +slovo
  • Takto z výsledků -slovo zcela vynechám
  • “Takto můžu najít celou frázi”

Cardiopulmonary exercise testing before lung resection surgery: still indicated? Evaluating predictive utility using machine learning

Identifikátory výsledku

  • Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

    <a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00159816%3A_____%2F26%3A00082383" target="_blank" >RIV/00159816:_____/26:00082383 - isvavai.cz</a>

  • Výsledek na webu

    <a href="https://thorax.bmj.com/content/81/5/474" target="_blank" >https://thorax.bmj.com/content/81/5/474</a>

  • DOI - Digital Object Identifier

    <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/thorax-2024-221485" target="_blank" >10.1136/thorax-2024-221485</a>

Alternativní jazyky

  • Jazyk výsledku

    angličtina

  • Název v původním jazyce

    Cardiopulmonary exercise testing before lung resection surgery: still indicated? Evaluating predictive utility using machine learning

  • Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

    Rationale Despite significant advances in patient care and outcomes, criteria for cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) in risk stratification guidelines for lung resection have not been updated in over a decade. We hypothesised that CPET no longer holds additional predictive value for postoperative complications.Methods In this secondary analysis, we included lung resection candidates from two prospective, multicentre studies eligible for CPET and assessed with preoperative pulmonary function tests (PFTs) and arterial blood gas analysis. Postoperative pulmonary (PPCs) and cardiovascular complications (PCCs) were documented during hospitalisation. We trained five types of machine learning models applying nested cross-validation to predict complications and compared predictive performance based on four metrics, including area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC).Results A total of 497 patients were included. PPCs developed in 71 (14%) patients. Adding CPET parameters to PFTs and baseline clinical data did not improve the ability of models to predict PPCs in unselected patients (AUC-ROC=0.72-0.78; p=0.47), nor in those meeting American College of Chest Physicians (ACCPs) (n=236; AUC-ROC=0.64-0.78; p=0.70) or European Respiratory Society/European Society of Thoracic Surgery (ERS/ESTS) criteria (n=168; AUC-ROC=0.59-0.76; p=0.92). PCCs developed in 90 (18%) patients. CPET parameters likewise did not improve model performance for the prediction of PCCs in unselected patients (AUC-ROC=0.65-0.73; p=0.96), nor in the ACCP (AUC-ROC=0.61-0.73; p=0.82) or ERS/ESTS subgroups (AUC-ROC=0.62-0.69; p=0.87).Conclusions In contemporary surgical practice, CPET did not improve the predictive performance of machine learning models for PPCs or PCCs in patients with an indication based on established guidelines or in those without. The role of CPET in preoperative risk stratification for lung resection should be re-evaluated.Trial registration number NCT03498352, NCT04826575.

  • Název v anglickém jazyce

    Cardiopulmonary exercise testing before lung resection surgery: still indicated? Evaluating predictive utility using machine learning

  • Popis výsledku anglicky

    Rationale Despite significant advances in patient care and outcomes, criteria for cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) in risk stratification guidelines for lung resection have not been updated in over a decade. We hypothesised that CPET no longer holds additional predictive value for postoperative complications.Methods In this secondary analysis, we included lung resection candidates from two prospective, multicentre studies eligible for CPET and assessed with preoperative pulmonary function tests (PFTs) and arterial blood gas analysis. Postoperative pulmonary (PPCs) and cardiovascular complications (PCCs) were documented during hospitalisation. We trained five types of machine learning models applying nested cross-validation to predict complications and compared predictive performance based on four metrics, including area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC).Results A total of 497 patients were included. PPCs developed in 71 (14%) patients. Adding CPET parameters to PFTs and baseline clinical data did not improve the ability of models to predict PPCs in unselected patients (AUC-ROC=0.72-0.78; p=0.47), nor in those meeting American College of Chest Physicians (ACCPs) (n=236; AUC-ROC=0.64-0.78; p=0.70) or European Respiratory Society/European Society of Thoracic Surgery (ERS/ESTS) criteria (n=168; AUC-ROC=0.59-0.76; p=0.92). PCCs developed in 90 (18%) patients. CPET parameters likewise did not improve model performance for the prediction of PCCs in unselected patients (AUC-ROC=0.65-0.73; p=0.96), nor in the ACCP (AUC-ROC=0.61-0.73; p=0.82) or ERS/ESTS subgroups (AUC-ROC=0.62-0.69; p=0.87).Conclusions In contemporary surgical practice, CPET did not improve the predictive performance of machine learning models for PPCs or PCCs in patients with an indication based on established guidelines or in those without. The role of CPET in preoperative risk stratification for lung resection should be re-evaluated.Trial registration number NCT03498352, NCT04826575.

Klasifikace

  • Druh

    J<sub>imp</sub> - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science

  • CEP obor

  • OECD FORD obor

    30212 - Surgery

Návaznosti výsledku

  • Projekt

    <a href="/cs/project/NU21-06-00086" target="_blank" >NU21-06-00086: Trénink dechových svalů jako způsob pre-habilitace před plicním resekčním zákrokem</a><br>

  • Návaznosti

    P - Projekt vyzkumu a vyvoje financovany z verejnych zdroju (s odkazem do CEP)

Ostatní

  • Rok uplatnění

    2026

  • Kód důvěrnosti údajů

    S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Údaje specifické pro druh výsledku

  • Název periodika

    THORAX

  • ISSN

    0040-6376

  • e-ISSN

    1468-3296

  • Svazek periodika

    81

  • Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

    5

  • Stát vydavatele periodika

    GB - Spojené království Velké Británie a Severního Irska

  • Počet stran výsledku

    9

  • Strana od-do

    "474–482"

  • Kód UT WoS článku

    001587262500001

  • EID výsledku v databázi Scopus