Machine Learning to Analyze Factors Associated With Ten-Year Graft Survival of Keratoplasty for Cornea Endothelial Disease

Purpose Machine learning analysis of factors associated with 10-year graft survival of Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK) and penetrating keratoplasty (PK) in Asian eyes. Methods Prospective study of donor characteristics, clinical outcomes and complications from consecutive patients (n = 1,335) who underwent DSAEK (946 eyes) or PK (389 eyes) for Fuchs’ endothelial dystrophy (FED) or bullous keratopathy (BK) were analyzed. Random survival forests (RSF) analysis using the highest variable importance (VIMP) factors were determined to develop the optimal Cox proportional hazards regression model. Main outcome measure was 10-year graft survival with RSF analysis of factors associated with graft failure. Results Mean age was 68 ± 11 years, 47.6% male, in our predominantly Chinese (76.6%) Asian cohort, with more BK compared to FED (62.2 vs. 37.8%, P < 0.001). Overall 10-year survival for DSAEK was superior to PK (73.6 vs. 50.9%, log-rank P < 0.001). RSF based on VIMP (best Harrell C statistic: 0.701) with multivariable modeling revealed that BK (HR:2.84, 95%CI:1.89–4.26; P < 0.001), PK (HR: 1.64, 95%CI:1.19–2.27; P = 0.002), male recipients (HR:1.75, 95%CI:1.31–2.34; P < 0.001) and poor pre-operative visual acuity (HR: 1.60, 95%CI:1.15–2.22, P = 0.005) were associated with graft failure. Ten-year cumulative incidence of complications such as immune-mediated graft rejection (P < 0.001), epitheliopathy (P < 0.001), and wound dehiscence (P = 0.002) were greater in the PK compared to the DSAEK group. Conclusion In our study, RSF combined with Cox regression was superior to traditional regression techniques alone in analyzing a large number of high-dimensional factors associated with 10-year corneal graft survival in Asian eyes with cornea endothelial disease.

[1]  H. Ishwaran,et al.  Random Survival Forests Analysis of Intraoperative Complications as Predictors of Descemet Stripping Automated Endothelial Keratoplasty Graft Failure in the Cornea Preservation Time Study. , 2020, JAMA ophthalmology.

[2]  J. Hallak A Machine Learning Model With Survival Statistics to Identify Predictors of Descemet Stripping Automated Endothelial Keratoplasty Graft Failure. , 2020, JAMA ophthalmology.

[3]  L. de Benito-Llopis,et al.  Long-term review of Penetrating Keratoplasty: A 20-year review in Asian eyes. , 2020, American journal of ophthalmology.

[4]  J. Mehta,et al.  Evolution of therapies for the corneal endothelium: past, present and future approaches , 2020, British Journal of Ophthalmology.

[5]  M. Ang,et al.  Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty versus Descemet Stripping Automated Endothelial Keratoplasty and Penetrating Keratoplasty. , 2019, American journal of ophthalmology.

[6]  Hemant Ishwaran,et al.  Random Survival Forests , 2008, Wiley StatsRef: Statistics Reference Online.

[7]  A. Aldave,et al.  Etiology of Global Corneal Blindness and Current Practices of Corneal Transplantation: A Focused Review , 2018, Cornea.

[8]  David A. Price,et al.  Five-Year Graft Survival of Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty (EK) versus Descemet Stripping EK and the Effect of Donor Sex Matching. , 2018, Ophthalmology.

[9]  Marcus Ang,et al.  Long-term Visual Outcomes Comparing Descemet Stripping Automated Endothelial Keratoplasty and Penetrating Keratoplasty. , 2017, American journal of ophthalmology.

[10]  Maia Lesosky,et al.  A comparison of the conditional inference survival forest model to random survival forests based on a simulation study as well as on two applications with time-to-event data , 2017, BMC Medical Research Methodology.

[11]  E. Hollick,et al.  Modeling Endothelial Cell Loss After Descemet Stripping Endothelial Keratoplasty: Data From 5 Years of Follow-up , 2017, Cornea.

[12]  D. Larkin,et al.  The Influence of Donor and Recipient Gender Incompatibility on Corneal Transplant Rejection and Failure , 2017, American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.

[13]  T. Ambergen,et al.  Changing Practice Patterns and Long-term Outcomes of Endothelial Versus Penetrating Keratoplasty: A Prospective Dutch Registry Study. , 2016, American journal of ophthalmology.

[14]  J. Mehta,et al.  Five-Year Graft Survival Comparing Descemet Stripping Automated Endothelial Keratoplasty and Penetrating Keratoplasty. , 2016, Ophthalmology.

[15]  Gilles Thuret,et al.  Global Survey of Corneal Transplantation and Eye Banking. , 2016, JAMA ophthalmology.

[16]  Sanjay V. Patel,et al.  Descemet Stripping Endothelial Keratoplasty for Fuchs' Endothelial Corneal Dystrophy: Five-Year Results of a Prospective Study. , 2016, Ophthalmology.

[17]  R. Chuck,et al.  Keratoplasty in the United States: A 10-Year Review from 2005 through 2014. , 2015, Ophthalmology.

[18]  J. Mehta,et al.  Visual acuity and contrast sensitivity following Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty , 2015, British Journal of Ophthalmology.

[19]  R. Beck,et al.  Factors associated with corneal graft survival in the cornea donor study. , 2015, JAMA ophthalmology.

[20]  T. Albini,et al.  Center and Surgeon Effect on Outcomes of Endothelial Keratoplasty Versus Penetrating Keratoplasty in the United Kingdom , 2015 .

[21]  M. Ang,et al.  Development of Selective Lamellar Keratoplasty within an Asian Corneal Transplant Program: The Singapore Corneal Transplant Study (An American Ophthalmological Society Thesis). , 2015, Transactions of the American Ophthalmological Society.

[22]  J. Mehta,et al.  Endothelial keratoplasty after failed penetrating keratoplasty: an alternative to repeat penetrating keratoplasty. , 2014, American journal of ophthalmology.

[23]  I. Dapena,et al.  Re: Coster et al.: A comparison of lamellar and penetrating keratoplasty outcomes (Ophthalmology 2014;121:979-87). , 2014, Ophthalmology (Rochester, Minn.).

[24]  J. Mehta,et al.  Comparison of a donor insertion device to sheets glide in Descemet stripping endothelial keratoplasty: 3-year outcomes. , 2014, American journal of ophthalmology.

[25]  D. Coster,et al.  A comparison of lamellar and penetrating keratoplasty outcomes: a registry study. , 2014, Ophthalmology.

[26]  Sanjay V. Patel,et al.  Keratoplasty outcomes: are we making advances? , 2014, Ophthalmology.

[27]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[28]  D. Larkin,et al.  Center and surgeon effect on outcomes of endothelial keratoplasty versus penetrating keratoplasty in the United Kingdom. , 2014, American journal of ophthalmology.

[29]  R. D. Stulting,et al.  The effect of donor age on penetrating keratoplasty for endothelial disease: graft survival after 10 years in the Cornea Donor Study. , 2013, Ophthalmology.

[30]  J. Mehta,et al.  Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty with a donor insertion device: clinical results and complications in 100 eyes. , 2013, American journal of ophthalmology.

[31]  Marcus Ang,et al.  Cost-effectiveness of Descemet's stripping endothelial keratoplasty versus penetrating keratoplasty. , 2013, Ophthalmology.

[32]  Marcus Ang,et al.  Endothelial cell loss and graft survival after Descemet's stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty and penetrating keratoplasty. , 2012, Ophthalmology.

[33]  Marcus Ang,et al.  Indications, outcomes, and risk factors for failure in tectonic keratoplasty. , 2012, Ophthalmology.

[34]  J. Mehta,et al.  Endothelial cell counts after Descemet’s stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty versus penetrating keratoplasty in Asian eyes , 2012, Clinical ophthalmology.

[35]  J. Mehta,et al.  Donor and surgical risk factors for primary graft failure following Descemet’s stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty in Asian eyes , 2011, Clinical ophthalmology.

[36]  David A. Price,et al.  Descemet's stripping endothelial keratoplasty five-year graft survival and endothelial cell loss. , 2011, Ophthalmology.

[37]  Ryan E Wiegand,et al.  Performance of using multiple stepwise algorithms for variable selection , 2010, Statistics in medicine.

[38]  Udaya B. Kogalur,et al.  Consistency of Random Survival Forests. , 2008, Statistics & probability letters.

[39]  Roni M. Shtein,et al.  Ophthalmic Technology Assessment Descemet ’ s Stripping Endothelial Keratoplasty : Safety and Outcomes , 2022 .

[40]  Y. Chan,et al.  Penetrating keratoplasty in Asian eyes: the Singapore Corneal Transplant Study. , 2008, Ophthalmology.

[41]  D. Coster,et al.  The Australian Corneal Graft Registry 2012 Report , 2012 .

[42]  A. Huk,et al.  Temporal Dynamics Underlying Perceptual Decision Making: Insights from the Interplay between an Attractor Model and Parietal Neurophysiology , 2008, Front. Neurosci..

[43]  L. Dandona,et al.  Survival analysis and visual outcome in a large series of corneal transplants in India , 1997, The British journal of ophthalmology.

[44]  A Registry Study , 1934 .