Prediction of Perforated and Nonperforated Acute Appendicitis Using Machine Learning-Based Explainable Artificial Intelligence

Background: The primary aim of this study was to create a machine learning (ML) model that can predict perforated and nonperforated acute appendicitis (AAp) with high accuracy and to demonstrate the clinical interpretability of the model with explainable artificial intelligence (XAI). Method: A total of 1797 patients who underwent appendectomy with a preliminary diagnosis of AAp between May 2009 and March 2022 were included in the study. Considering the histopathological examination, the patients were divided into two groups as AAp (n = 1465) and non-AAp (NA; n = 332); the non-AAp group is also referred to as negative appendectomy. Subsequently, patients confirmed to have AAp were divided into two subgroups: nonperforated (n = 1161) and perforated AAp (n = 304). The missing values in the data set were assigned using the Random Forest method. The Boruta variable selection method was used to identify the most important variables associated with AAp and perforated AAp. The class imbalance problem in the data set was resolved by the SMOTE method. The CatBoost model was used to classify AAp and non-AAp patients and perforated and nonperforated AAp patients. The performance of the model in the holdout test set was evaluated with accuracy, F1- score, sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operator curve (AUC). The SHAP method, which is one of the XAI methods, was used to interpret the model results. Results: The CatBoost model could distinguish AAp patients from non-AAp individuals with an accuracy of 88.2% (85.6–90.8%), while distinguishing perforated AAp patients from nonperforated AAp individuals with an accuracy of 92% (89.6–94.5%). According to the results of the SHAP method applied to the CatBoost model, it was observed that high total bilirubin, WBC, Netrophil, WLR, NLR, CRP, and WNR values, and low PNR, PDW, and MCV values increased the prediction of AAp biochemically. On the other hand, high CRP, Age, Total Bilirubin, PLT, RDW, WBC, MCV, WLR, NLR, and Neutrophil values, and low Lymphocyte, PDW, MPV, and PNR values were observed to increase the prediction of perforated AAp. Conclusion: For the first time in the literature, a new approach combining ML and XAI methods was tried to predict AAp and perforated AAp, and both clinical conditions were predicted with high accuracy. This new approach proved successful in showing how well which demographic and biochemical parameters could explain the current clinical situation in predicting AAp and perforated AAp.

[1]  E. Gonullu,et al.  Comparison of scoring systems regarding the gender as a parameter with the traditional scoring systems for predicting appendicitis , 2022, Updates in Surgery.

[2]  O. Andronic,et al.  Clinical Applications of Artificial Intelligence—An Updated Overview , 2022, Journal of clinical medicine.

[3]  Maad M. Mijwil,et al.  A diagnostic testing for people with appendicitis using machine learning techniques , 2022, Multimedia Tools and Applications.

[4]  Majdi M. Mafarja,et al.  Performance optimization of support vector machine with oppositional grasshopper optimization for acute appendicitis diagnosis , 2022, Comput. Biol. Medicine.

[5]  T. Sasano,et al.  Artificial intelligence and cardiology: Current status and perspective: Artificial Intelligence and Cardiology. , 2021, Journal of cardiology.

[6]  Elham Rafiei-Sardooi,et al.  Gully Erosion Susceptibility Assessment in the Kondoran Watershed Using Machine Learning Algorithms and the Boruta Feature Selection , 2021, Sustainability.

[7]  P. Rajesh,et al.  Appendicitis Inflammatory Response Score in Comparison to Alvarado Score in Acute Appendicitis , 2021, The Surgery Journal.

[8]  E. Samdanci,et al.  An investigation into the factors predicting acute appendicitis and perforated appendicitis. , 2021, Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES.

[9]  S. Akbulut,et al.  Assessment of demographic, clinical and histopathological features of patients who underwent appendectomy due to a presumed diagnosis of acute appendicitis. , 2021, Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES.

[10]  Sami Ben Jabeur,et al.  CatBoost model and artificial intelligence techniques for corporate failure prediction , 2021 .

[11]  Dakshitha Wickramasinghe,et al.  The Worldwide Epidemiology of Acute Appendicitis: An Analysis of the Global Health Data Exchange Dataset , 2021, World Journal of Surgery.

[12]  A. Soltanian,et al.  Biomarker of urinary 5-HIAA as a valuable predictor of acute appendicitis , 2020, Practical laboratory medicine.

[13]  Cuntai Guan,et al.  A Survey on Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Toward Medical XAI , 2019, IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems.

[14]  L. Maurer,et al.  Leveraging interpretable machine learning algorithms to predict postoperative patient outcomes on mobile devices. , 2020, Surgery.

[15]  S. Akbulut,et al.  Liver transplant versus non-liver transplant patients underwent appendectomy with presumed diagnosis of acute appendicitis: Case-control study. , 2020, Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES.

[16]  S. Akbulut,et al.  Comparison of the demographic and clinical features of pregnant and non-pregnant patients undergoing appendectomy. , 2020, Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES.

[17]  Jürgen Bajorath,et al.  Interpretation of machine learning models using shapley values: application to compound potency and multi-target activity predictions , 2020, Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design.

[18]  H. Erbay,et al.  The Use of Machine Learning Approaches for the Diagnosis of Acute Appendicitis , 2020, Emergency medicine international.

[19]  Mukund Sundararajan,et al.  The many Shapley values for model explanation , 2019, ICML.

[20]  Guang-Zhong Yang,et al.  XAI—Explainable artificial intelligence , 2019, Science Robotics.

[21]  M. Surbatovic,et al.  Possible cytokine biomarkers in pediatric acute appendicitis , 2019, Italian Journal of Pediatrics.

[22]  A. Romualdi,et al.  Diagnosis and classification of pediatric acute appendicitis by artificial intelligence methods: An investigator-independent approach , 2019, PloS one.

[23]  Klaus-Robert Müller,et al.  Towards Explainable Artificial Intelligence , 2019, Explainable AI.

[24]  Alexander Shukhman,et al.  Attack Detection in Enterprise Networks by Machine Learning Methods , 2019, 2019 International Russian Automation Conference (RusAutoCon).

[25]  Song Liu,et al.  Meta-analysis of studies comparing conservative treatment with antibiotics and appendectomy for acute appendicitis in the adult , 2019, BMC Surgery.

[26]  H. Özen,et al.  A Study on Missing Data Problem in Random Forest , 2019 .

[27]  E. Samdanci,et al.  Comparison of clinical and histopathological features of patients who underwent incidental or emergency appendectomy , 2019, World journal of gastrointestinal surgery.

[28]  Anna Veronika Dorogush,et al.  CatBoost: gradient boosting with categorical features support , 2018, ArXiv.

[29]  Hyukjung Kim,et al.  CT Scan Findings Can Predict the Safety of Delayed Appendectomy for Acute Appendicitis , 2018, Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery.

[30]  Filip Karlo Dosilovic,et al.  Explainable artificial intelligence: A survey , 2018, 2018 41st International Convention on Information and Communication Technology, Electronics and Microelectronics (MIPRO).

[31]  Anna Veronika Dorogush,et al.  CatBoost: unbiased boosting with categorical features , 2017, NeurIPS.

[32]  G. Kaplan,et al.  The Global Incidence of Appendicitis: A Systematic Review of Population-based Studies , 2017, Annals of surgery.

[33]  Scott Lundberg,et al.  A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictions , 2017, NIPS.

[34]  Hyukjung Kim,et al.  Appendectomy: Should it be Performed So Quickly? , 2016, The American surgeon.

[35]  Chien-Lung Chan,et al.  Epidemiology and socioeconomic features of appendicitis in Taiwan: a 12-year population-based study , 2015, World Journal of Emergency Surgery.

[36]  S. Pocock,et al.  Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): Explanation and Elaboration , 2007, PLoS medicine.

[37]  Paul Jen-Hwa Hu,et al.  A preclustering-based ensemble learning technique for acute appendicitis diagnoses , 2013, Artif. Intell. Medicine.

[38]  Haibo He,et al.  Learning from Imbalanced Data , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering.

[39]  J. Tuynman,et al.  Evaluating routine diagnostic imaging in acute appendicitis. , 2009, International journal of surgery.

[40]  P. Ziprin,et al.  Artificial Neural Networks: Useful Aid in Diagnosing Acute Appendicitis , 2008, World Journal of Surgery.

[41]  S. Pocock,et al.  Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration. , 2007, Annals of internal medicine.

[42]  Nitesh V. Chawla,et al.  SMOTE: Synthetic Minority Over-sampling Technique , 2002, J. Artif. Intell. Res..