Machine Learning–Based Prediction of Small Intracranial Aneurysm Rupture Status Using CTA-Derived Hemodynamics: A Multicenter Study

References

1. 1.↵
   1. Vlak MH,
   2. Algra A,
   3. Brandenburg R, et al

   . Prevalence of unruptured intracranial aneurysms, with emphasis on sex, age, comorbidity, country, and time period: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Neurol 2011;10:626–36 doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(11)70109-0 pmid:21641282

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
2. 2.↵
   1. Murayama Y,
   2. Takao H,
   3. Ishibashi T, et al

   . Risk analysis of unruptured intracranial aneurysms: prospective 10-year cohort study. Stroke 2016;47:365–71 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.115.010698 pmid:26742803

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
3. 3.↵
   1. Lee GJ,
   2. Eom KS,
   3. Lee C, et al

   . Rupture of very small intracranial aneurysms: incidence and clinical characteristics. J Cerebrovasc Endovasc Neurosurg 2015;17:217–22 doi:10.7461/jcen.2015.17.3.217 pmid:26526401

   CrossRefPubMed
4. 4.↵
   1. Bender MT,
   2. Wendt H,
   3. Monarch T, et al

   . Small aneurysms account for the majority and increasing percentage of aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: a 25-year, single-institution study. Neurosurgery 2018;83:692–99 doi:10.1093/neuros/nyx484 pmid:29029314

   CrossRefPubMed
5. 5.↵
   1. Malhotra A,
   2. Wu X,
   3. Forman HP, et al

   . Management of tiny unruptured intracranial aneurysms: a comparative effectiveness analysis. JAMA Neurol 2018;75:27–34 doi:10.1001/jamaneurol.2017.3232 pmid:29159405

   CrossRefPubMed
6. 6.↵
   1. Malhotra A,
   2. Wu X,
   3. Forman HP, et al

   . Growth and rupture risk of small unruptured intracranial aneurysms. Ann Intern Med 2017;167:26–33 doi:10.7326/M17-0246 pmid:28586893

   CrossRefPubMed
7. 7.↵
   1. Thompson BG,
   2. Brown RD Jr.,
   3. Amin-Hanjani S, et al

   . American Stroke Association, American Heart Association Stroke Council, Council on Cardiovascular and Stroke Nursing, and Council on Epidemiology and Prevention. Guidelines for the management of patients with unruptured intracranial aneurysms: a guideline for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke 2015;46:2368–400 doi:10.1161/STR.0000000000000070 pmid:26089327

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
8. 8.↵
   1. Greving JP,
   2. Wermer MJ,
   3. Brown RD Jr., et al

   . Development of the PHASES score for prediction of risk of rupture of intracranial aneurysms: a pooled analysis of six prospective cohort studies. Lancet Neurol 2014;13:59–66 doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(13)70263-1 pmid:24290159

   CrossRefPubMed
9. 9.↵
   1. UCAS Japan Investigators,
   2. Morita A,
   3. Kirino T, et al

   . UCAS Japan Investigators. The natural course of unruptured cerebral aneurysms in a Japanese cohort. N Engl J Med 2012;366:2474–82 doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1113260] pmid:22738097

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
10. 10.↵
    1. Kataoka K,
    2. Taneda M,
    3. Asai T, et al

    . Difference in nature of ruptured and unruptured cerebral aneurysms. Lancet 2000;355:203 doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(99)03881-7 pmid:10675125

    CrossRefPubMed
11. 11.↵
    1. Meng H,
    2. Tutino VM,
    3. Xiang J, et al

    . High WSS or low WSS? Complex interactions of hemodynamics with intracranial aneurysm initiation, growth, and rupture: toward a unifying hypothesis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2014;35:1254–62 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3558 pmid:23598838

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
12. 12.↵
    1. Suzuki T,
    2. Takao H,
    3. Rapaka S, et al

    . Rupture risk of small unruptured intracranial aneurysms in Japanese adults. Stroke 2020;51:641–43 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.119.027664 pmid:31813355

    CrossRefPubMed
13. 13.↵
    1. Güresir E,
    2. Vatter H,
    3. Schuss P, et al

    . Natural history of small unruptured anterior circulation aneurysms: a prospective cohort study. Stroke 2013;44:3027–31 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.113.001107 pmid:24003049

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
14. 14.↵
    1. Varble N,
    2. Tutino VM,
    3. Yu J, et al

    . Shared and distinct rupture discriminants of small and large intracranial aneurysms. Stroke 2018;49:856–64 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.117.019929 pmid:29535267

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
15. 15.↵
    1. Krittanawong C,
    2. Zhang H,
    3. Wang Z, et al

    . Artificial intelligence in precision cardiovascular medicine. J Am Coll Cardiol 2017;69:2657–64 doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2017.03.571 pmid:28545640

    FREE Full Text
16. 16.↵
    1. Darcy AM,
    2. Louie AK,
    3. Roberts LW

    . Machine learning and the profession of medicine. JAMA 2016;315:551–52 doi:10.1001/jama.2015.18421 pmid:26864406

    CrossRefPubMed
17. 17.↵
    1. Beam AL,
    2. Kohane IS

    . Big data and machine learning in health care. JAMA 2018;319:1317–18 doi:10.1001/jama.2017.18391 pmid:29532063

    CrossRefPubMed
18. 18.↵
    1. Zack CJ,
    2. Senecal C,
    3. Kinar Y, et al

    . Leveraging machine learning techniques to forecast patient prognosis after percutaneous coronary intervention. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2019;12:1304–11 doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2019.02.035 pmid:31255564

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
19. 19.↵
    1. Tanioka S,
    2. Ishida F,
    3. Yamamoto A, et al

    . Machine learning classification of cerebral aneurysm rupture status with morphologic variables and hemodynamic parameters. Radiology: Artifcial Intelligence 2020;2:e190077 doi:10.1148/ryai.2019190077

    CrossRef
20. 20.↵
    1. Kim HC,
    2. Rhim JK,
    3. Ahn JH, et al

    . Machine learning application for rupture risk assessment in small-sized intracranial aneurysm. J Clin Med 2019;8:683 doi:10.3390/jcm8050683 pmid:31096607

    CrossRefPubMed
21. 21.↵
    1. Ren Y,
    2. Chen GZ,
    3. Liu Z, et al

    . Reproducibility of image-based computational models of intracranial aneurysm: a comparison between 3D rotational angiography, CT angiography and MR angiography. Biomed Eng Online 2016;15:50 doi:10.1186/s12938-016-0163-4 pmid:27150439

    CrossRefPubMed
22. 22.↵
    1. Can A,
    2. Du R

    . Association of hemodynamic factors with intracranial aneurysm formation and rupture: systematic review and meta-analysis. Neurosurgery 2016;78:510–20 doi:10.1227/NEU.0000000000001083 pmid:26516819

    CrossRefPubMed
23. 23.↵
    1. Cebral JR,
    2. Mut F,
    3. Weir J, et al

    . Association of hemodynamic characteristics and cerebral aneurysm rupture. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2011;32:264–70 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A2274 pmid:21051508

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
24. 24.↵
    1. Detmer FJ,
    2. Chung BJ,
    3. Mut F, et al

    . Development and internal validation of an aneurysm rupture probability model based on patient characteristics and aneurysm location, morphology, and hemodynamics. Int J Comput Assist Radiology Surg 2018;13:1767–79 doi:10.1007/s11548-018-1837-0 pmid:30094777

    CrossRefPubMed
25. 25.↵
    1. Hanley JA,
    2. McNeil BJ

    . The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology 1982;143:29–36 doi:10.1148/radiology.143.1.7063747 pmid:7063747

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
26. 26.↵
    1. Pedregosa F,
    2. Varoquaux G,
    3. Gramfort A, et al

    . Scikit-learn: machine learning in Python. Journal of Machine Leaning Research 2011;12:2825–30
27. 27.↵
    1. Hae H,
    2. Kang SJ,
    3. Kim WJ, et al

    . Machine learning assessment of myocardial ischemia using angiography: development and retrospective validation. PLoS Med 2018;15:e1002693 doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1002693 pmid:30422987

    CrossRefPubMed
28. 28.↵
    1. Detmer FJ,
    2. Lückehe D,
    3. Mut F, et al

    . Comparison of statistical learning approaches for cerebral aneurysm rupture assessment. Int J Comput Assist Radiology Surg 2019;15:1401–50 doi:10.1007/s11548-019-02065-2 pmid:31485987

    CrossRefPubMed
29. 29.↵
    1. Chiu JJ,
    2. Chien S

    . Effects of disturbed flow on vascular endothelium: pathophysiological basis and clinical perspectives. Physiol Rev 2011;91:327–87 doi:10.1152/physrev.00047.2009 pmid:21248169

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
30. 30.↵
    1. Chatziprodromou I,
    2. Tricoli A,
    3. Poulikakos D, et al

    . Haemodynamics and wall remodelling of a growing cerebral aneurysm: a computational model. J Biomech 2007;40:412–26 doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2005.12.009 pmid:16527284

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
31. 31.↵
    1. Pereira VM,
    2. Brina O,
    3. Bijlenga P, et al

    . Wall shear stress distribution of small aneurysms prone to rupture: a case-control study. Stroke 2014;45:261–64 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.113.003247 pmid:24253545

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
32. 32.↵
    1. Lauric A,
    2. Hippelheuser J,
    3. Cohen AD, et al

    . Wall shear stress association with rupture status in volume matched sidewall aneurysms. J Neurointerv Surg 2014;6:466–73 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2013-010871 pmid:23929550

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
33. 33.↵
    1. Miura Y,
    2. Ishida F,
    3. Umeda Y, et al

    . Low wall shear stress is independently associated with the rupture status of middle cerebral artery aneurysms. Stroke 2013;44:519–21 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.112.675306 pmid:23223503

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
34. 34.↵
    1. Goubergrits L,
    2. Schaller J,
    3. Kertzscher U, et al

    . Statistical wall shear stress maps of ruptured and unruptured middle cerebral artery aneurysms. J R Soc Interface 2012;9:677–88 doi:10.1098/rsif.2011.0490 pmid:21957117

    CrossRefPubMed
35. 35.↵
    1. Chalouhi N,
    2. Hoh BL,
    3. Hasan D

    . Review of cerebral aneurysm formation, growth, and rupture. Stroke 2013;44:3613–22 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.113.002390 pmid:24130141

    FREE Full Text
36. 36.↵
    1. Xiang J,
    2. Natarajan SK,
    3. Tremmel M, et al

    . Hemodynamic-morphologic discriminants for intracranial aneurysm rupture. Stroke 2011;42:144–52 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.110.592923 pmid:21106956

    CrossRefPubMed
37. 37.↵
    1. Liang L,
    2. Steinman DA,
    3. Brina O, et al

    . Towards the clinical utility of CFD for assessment of intracranial aneurysm rupture: a systematic review and novel parameter-ranking tool. J Neurointerv Surg 2019;11:153–58 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2018-014246 pmid:30341160

    Abstract/FREE Full Text