Wang Shi-Qi, Qiu Kan, Zheng Qi-Rui, Zhou Bing-Jie, Li Ming-Yu, Zhong Hai-Yan, Chen Yong, Yuan Si-Ming
Department of Burns and Plastic Surgery, Jinling Hospital, Jinling Clinical Medical College, Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China.
Department of Burns and Plastic Surgery, Jinling Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Medical School, Nanjing University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China.
Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2025 Aug 18;15:1586087. doi: 10.3389/fcimb.2025.1586087. eCollection 2025.
Burn injuries are a common cause of trauma globally, with extensive burns (≥ 50% total body surface area burned) associated with high rates of sepsis and mortality. This study aims to identify risk factors associated with sepsis and mortality in extensively burned patients and to develop accurate, interpretable predictive models via machine learning algorithms.
A retrospective cohort study was conducted utilizing data from two Burn Critical Care Units in Eastern China from 2012-2023. A total of 237 patients with extensive burns were included. We applied ten machine learning algorithms, including random forest, gradient boosting tree (GBT), and logistic regression, to predict sepsis and mortality. The models were evaluated via AUC, precision, recall, accuracy, and F1 score, and were compared with the SOFA score performance. Model interpretability was enhanced via SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP).
The key predictive factors for sepsis included the SOFA score, new onset shock, albumin, blood urea nitrogen (BUN), third-degree burned area, TBSA burned, white blood cell count, and inhalation injury. For mortality, the key predictive factors included alanine aminotransferase (ALT), the SOFA score, type of burn, new onset shock, third-degree burn area, TBSA burned, and sepsis. The RF model demonstrated superior performance in predicting sepsis (AUC = 0.977, accuracy = 0.945, recall = 0.964, precision = 0.930, and F1 score = 0.945). For mortality prediction, the GBT model yielded the highest AUC of 0.981 (accuracy = 0.952, recall = 0.965, precision = 0.942, and F1 score = 0.953). The sepsis prediction model outperformed the SOFA-based logistic regression model. Web-based calculators were developed to aid clinical decision-making.
Machine learning models, RF and GBT, demonstrate strong predictive ability for sepsis and mortality in extensive burn patients. The application of SHAP enhances model transparency, facilitating clinical interpretation and early intervention. Two web-based calculators can guide intensive care strategies and improve patient outcomes.
烧伤是全球创伤的常见原因,大面积烧伤(烧伤总面积≥50%)与败血症和死亡率的高发生率相关。本研究旨在确定大面积烧伤患者败血症和死亡率的相关危险因素,并通过机器学习算法开发准确、可解释的预测模型。
利用中国东部两个烧伤重症监护病房2012年至2023年的数据进行回顾性队列研究。共纳入237例大面积烧伤患者。我们应用了十种机器学习算法,包括随机森林、梯度提升树(GBT)和逻辑回归,来预测败血症和死亡率。通过AUC、精确率、召回率、准确率和F1分数对模型进行评估,并与序贯器官衰竭评估(SOFA)评分性能进行比较。通过夏普利值附加解释(SHAP)增强模型的可解释性。
败血症的关键预测因素包括SOFA评分、新发休克、白蛋白、血尿素氮(BUN)、三度烧伤面积、烧伤总面积、白细胞计数和吸入性损伤。对于死亡率,关键预测因素包括丙氨酸转氨酶(ALT)、SOFA评分、烧伤类型、新发休克、三度烧伤面积、烧伤总面积和败血症。随机森林(RF)模型在预测败血症方面表现出卓越性能(AUC = 0.977,准确率 = 0.945,召回率 = 0.964,精确率 = 0.930,F1分数 = 0.945)。对于死亡率预测,GBT模型的AUC最高,为0.981(准确率 = 0.952,召回率 = 0.965,精确率 = 0.942,F1分数 = 0.953)。败血症预测模型优于基于SOFA的逻辑回归模型。开发了基于网络的计算器以辅助临床决策。
机器学习模型RF和GBT在大面积烧伤患者败血症和死亡率预测方面显示出强大的预测能力。SHAP的应用提高了模型的透明度,便于临床解释和早期干预。两个基于网络的计算器可指导重症监护策略并改善患者预后。