Affiliations 

  • 1 Division of Gastroenterology, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, MD. Electronic address: tbrenne4@jhmi.edu
  • 2 Department of Biostatistics, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD. Electronic address: albertkuo@jhu.edu
  • 3 Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, Netherlands. Electronic address: christa.spernaweiland@radboudumc.nl
  • 4 Division of Gastroenterology, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, MD. Electronic address: akamal@aahs.org
  • 5 Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC. Electronic address: elmunzer@musc.edu
  • 6 Xijing Hospital of Digestive Diseases, Fourth Military Medical University, Xi'an, China. Electronic address: fmmulh@163.com
  • 7 Division of Gastroenterology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California. Electronic address: James.Buxbaum@med.usc.edu
  • 8 Section of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH. Electronic address: Timothy.B.Gardner@hitchcock.org
  • 9 Moffitt Cancer Center, Department of Gastrointestinal Oncology, Division of Gastroenterology, Tampa, FL. Electronic address: mok.shaffer@gmail.com
  • 10 Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN. Electronic address: efogel@iu.edu
  • 11 Klinik und Poliklinik für Innere Medizin II, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, München, Germany. Electronic address: veit.phillip@tum.de
  • 12 Department of Internal Medicine, Dankook University College of Medicine, Dankook University Hospital, Cheonan, Korea. Electronic address: mdcjh78@gmail.com
  • 13 Ministry of Health, Kota Kinabalu, Malaysia. Electronic address: guanway@hotmail.com
  • 14 Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Mackay Memorial Hospital, No. 92, Sec. 2, Chung-Shan North Road, Taipei, Taiwan. Electronic address: sunny.lin56@msa.hinet.net
  • 15 Department of Gastroenterology, Asian Institute of Gastroenterology, Hyderabad, India. Electronic address: aigindia@yahoo.co.in
  • 16 Department of Gastroenterology, Asian Institute of Gastroenterology, Hyderabad, India. Electronic address: drsundeeplakhtakia@gmail.com
  • 17 Department of Gastroenterology, Apollo Gleneagles Hospital, Kolkata, India. Electronic address: mkgkolkata@gmail.com
  • 18 Department of Gastroenterology, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education & Research, Chandigarh, India. Electronic address: dr_kochhar@hotmail.com
  • 19 Division of Gastroenterology, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, MD. Electronic address: mkhasha1@jhmi.edu
  • 20 Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, Netherlands. Electronic address: erwin.vanGeenen@radboudumc.nl
  • 21 Division of Gastroenterology, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, MD. Electronic address: vsingh1@jhmi.edu
  • 22 Department of Biostatistics, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD; Division of Biostatistics & Bioinformatics, Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Baltimore, MD. Electronic address: ctomasetti@jhu.edu
  • 23 Division of Gastroenterology, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, MD. Electronic address: vakshin1@jhmi.edu
Gastrointest Endosc, 2024 Aug 13.
PMID: 39147103 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2024.08.009

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: A robust model of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) risk is not currently available. We aimed to develop a machine learning-based tool for PEP risk prediction to aid in clinical decision-making related to periprocedural prophylaxis selection and post-procedural monitoring.

METHODS: Feature selection, model training, and validation were performed using patient-level data from 12 randomized controlled trials. A gradient-boosted machine (GBM) model was trained to estimate PEP risk and the performance of the resulting model was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) with 5-fold cross-validation. A web-based clinical decision-making tool was created, and a prospective pilot study was performed using data from ERCPs performed at the Johns Hopkins Hospital over a one-month period.

RESULTS: A total of 7389 patients were included in the GBM with an 8.6% rate of PEP. The model was trained on twenty PEP risk factors and 5 prophylactic interventions (rectal non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs [NSAID], aggressive hydration, combined rectal NSAID and aggressive hydration, pancreatic duct [PD] stenting, and combined rectal NSAID and PD stenting). The resulting GBM model had an AUC of 0.70 (65% specificity, 65% sensitivity, 95% negative predictive value, 15% positive predictive value). A total of 135 patients were included in the prospective pilot study, resulting in an AUC of 0.74.

CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the feasibility and utility of a novel machine learning-based PEP risk estimation tool with high negative predictive value to aid in prophylaxis selection and identify patients at low risk who may not require extended post-procedure monitoring.

* Title and MeSH Headings from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.