Back

Data-Driven Predictive Modeling for Massive Intraoperative Blood Loss during Liver Transplantation: Integrating Machine Learning Techniques

Wakiya, T.; Sanada, Y.; Okada, N.; Hirata, Y.; Horiuchi, T.; Omameuda, T.; Onishi, Y.; Sakuma, Y.; Yamaguchi, H.; Sasaki, Y.; Sata, N.

2025-05-27 surgery
10.1101/2025.05.25.25328319 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundMassive intraoperative bleeding (IBL) in liver transplantation (LT) poses serious risks and strains healthcare resources necessitating better predictive models for risk stratification. As traditional models often fail to capture the complex, non-linear patterns underlying bleeding risk, this study aimed to develop data-driven machine learning models for predicting massive IBL during LT using preoperative factors. MethodsTwo hundred ninety consecutive LT cases from a prospective database were analyzed. Logistic regression models were built using 73 preoperative demographic and laboratory variables to predict massive IBL ([≥] 80 mL/kg). The dataset was randomly split (70% training, 30% testing). The model was trained and validated through three-fold cross-validation, with backward stepwise feature selection iterated 100 times across unique random splits. The final model, based on a high stability index, was evaluated using the area under the curve (AUC). ResultsMassive IBL was observed in 141 patients (48.6%). In standard logistic regression, significant differences were found in 42 of 73 factors between groups stratified by massive IBL, however, substantial multicollinearity limited interpretability. In the feature selection across 100 iterations, the data-driven model achieved an average AUC of 0.840 in the validation and 0.738 in the test datasets. The final model, based on 11 selected features with a high stability index, achieved an AUC of 0.844. An easy-to-use online risk calculator for massive IBL was developed and is available at: https://tai1wakiya.shinyapps.io/ldlt_bleeding_ml/. ConclusionsOur findings highlight the potential of machine learning in capturing complex risk factor interactions for predicting massive IBL in LT.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Biology Methods and Protocols
53 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
15.3%
2
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 17%
10.5%
3
Frontiers in Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
8.5%
4
Journal of Clinical Medicine
91 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
6.6%
5
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 15%
6.6%
6
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
39 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
6.6%
50% of probability mass above
7
Frontiers in Oncology
95 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
5.0%
8
Heliyon
146 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
3.0%
9
BioMed Research International
25 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.5%
10
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 7%
2.2%
11
Transfusion
18 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.0%
12
Transplantation
13 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.0%
13
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.9%
14
Medicine
30 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.8%
15
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.8%
16
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 15%
1.8%
17
Cancers
200 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.3%
18
eBioMedicine
130 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.9%
19
Archives of Clinical and Biomedical Research
28 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
20
BMC Neurology
12 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.8%
21
Hepatology Communications
21 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.8%
22
Trials
25 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
23
Journal of the American Heart Association
119 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.5%
24
JMIR Research Protocols
18 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.5%