Liu Xiaoxiao, Flanagan Colin, Fang Jingchao, Lei Yiming, McGrath Launcelot, Wang Jun, Guo Xiangyang, Guo Jiangzhen, McGrath Harry, Han Yongzheng
Electronic and Computer Engineering, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland.
Department of Radiology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China.
Heliyon. 2022 Nov 23;8(11):e11761. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e11761. eCollection 2022 Nov.
Difficult laryngoscopy is associated with airway injury, and asphyxia. There are no guidelines or gold standards for detecting difficult laryngoscopy. There are many opinions on which predictors to use to detect difficult laryngoscopy exposure, and no comprehensively unified comparative analysis has been conducted. The efficacy and accuracy of deep learning (DL)-based models and machine learning (ML)-based models for predicting difficult laryngoscopy need to be evaluated and compared, under the circumstance that the flourishing of deep neural networks (DNN) has increasingly left ML less concentrated and uncreative. For the first time, the performance of difficult laryngoscopy prediction for a dataset of 671 patients, under single index and integrated multiple indicators was consistently verified under seven ML-based models and four DL-based approaches. The top dog was a simple traditional machine learning model, Naïve Bayes, outperforming DL-based models, the best test accuracy is 86.6%, the F1 score is 0.908, and the average precision score is 0.837. Three radiological variables of difficult laryngoscopy were all valuable separately and combinedly and the ranking was presented. There is no significant difference in performance among the three radiological indicators individually (83.06% vs. 83.20% vs. 83.33%) and comprehensively (83.74%), suggesting that anesthesiologists can flexibly choose appropriate measurement indicators according to the actual situation to predict difficult laryngoscopy. Adaptive spatial interaction was imposed to the model to boost the performance of difficult laryngoscopy prediction with preoperative cervical spine X-ray.
困难喉镜检查与气道损伤及窒息相关。目前尚无检测困难喉镜检查的指南或金标准。对于使用哪些预测指标来检测困难喉镜检查暴露存在诸多观点,且尚未进行全面统一的比较分析。在深度神经网络(DNN)蓬勃发展使得机器学习(ML)越来越缺乏专注性和创新性的情况下,需要评估和比较基于深度学习(DL)的模型和基于机器学习(ML)的模型预测困难喉镜检查的效能和准确性。首次在7种基于ML的模型和4种基于DL的方法下,对671例患者数据集在单一指标和综合多个指标情况下困难喉镜检查预测的性能进行了一致性验证。表现最佳的是一个简单的传统机器学习模型——朴素贝叶斯,其性能优于基于DL的模型,最佳测试准确率为86.6%,F1分数为0.908,平均精确率分数为0.837。困难喉镜检查的三个放射学变量单独及联合使用均有价值,并给出了排名。这三个放射学指标单独(83.06%对83.20%对83.33%)和综合(83.74%)时的性能无显著差异,这表明麻醉医生可根据实际情况灵活选择合适的测量指标来预测困难喉镜检查。对模型施加自适应空间交互以提高术前颈椎X线预测困难喉镜检查的性能。