Goyal Neeraj K, Kumar Abhay, Trivedi Sameer, Dwivedi Udai S, Singh T N, Singh Pratap B
Department of Urology, Institute of Medical Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, India.
Saudi J Kidney Dis Transpl. 2010 Nov;21(6):1073-80.
To compare the accuracy of artificial neural network (ANN) analysis and multi-variate regression analysis (MVRA) for renal stone fragmentation by extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL). A total of 276 patients with renal calculus were treated by ESWL during December 2001 to December 2006. Of them, the data of 196 patients were used for training the ANN. The predictability of trained ANN was tested on 80 subsequent patients. The input data include age of patient, stone size, stone burden, number of sittings and urinary pH. The output values (predicted values) were number of shocks and shock power. Of these 80 patients, the input was analyzed and output was also calculated by MVRA. The output values (predicted values) from both the methods were compared and the results were drawn. The predicted and observed values of shock power and number of shocks were compared using 1:1 slope line. The results were calculated as coefficient of correlation (COC) (r2 ). For prediction of power, the MVRA COC was 0.0195 and ANN COC was 0.8343. For prediction of number of shocks, the MVRA COC was 0.5726 and ANN COC was 0.9329. In conclusion, ANN gives better COC than MVRA, hence could be a better tool to analyze the optimum renal stone fragmentation by ESWL.
比较人工神经网络(ANN)分析和多变量回归分析(MVRA)在体外冲击波碎石术(ESWL)治疗肾结石时的准确性。2001年12月至2006年12月期间,共有276例肾结石患者接受了ESWL治疗。其中,196例患者的数据用于训练ANN。对随后的80例患者测试训练后ANN的可预测性。输入数据包括患者年龄、结石大小、结石负荷、治疗次数和尿液pH值。输出值(预测值)为冲击次数和冲击能量。对这80例患者,分析其输入数据,并通过MVRA计算输出值。比较两种方法的输出值(预测值)并得出结果。使用1:1斜率线比较冲击能量和冲击次数的预测值与观察值。结果以相关系数(COC)(r2)计算。对于能量预测,MVRA的COC为0.0195,ANN的COC为0.8343。对于冲击次数预测,MVRA的COC为0.5726,ANN的COC为0.9329。总之,ANN的COC比MVRA更好,因此可能是分析ESWL治疗肾结石最佳效果的更好工具。