Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Objective: To develop and evaluate machine-learning models for predicting postoperative bleeding after mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PCNL) using preoperative clinical parameters only. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 1515 patients who underwent mini-PCNL between January 2014 and January 2026. Postoperative bleeding and a postoperative day-1 hemoglobin decrease ≥2 g/dL occurred in 273 patients (18%). All intra- and postoperative variables were excluded to preserve a genuinely preoperative tool, leaving 15 preoperative predictors. Penalized logistic regression, random forest, Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost), and light gradient boosting machine (LightGBM) were developed under a strictly patient-level scheme with nested cross-validation; all preprocessing and categorical-aware oversampling (SMOTENC) were fitted within training folds only. Discrimination (AUC: with 95% confidence intervals [CIs]), calibration (Brier score, calibration slope), and decision-curve analysis were assessed on an untouched hold-out set, with a sensitivity analysis excluding preoperative hematocrit (HCT). Results: In the patient-isolated hold-out set (303 patients, 52 events), random forest achieved the best discrimination (AUC: 0.856, 95% CI: 0.787–0.925), followed by XGBoost (0.838) and LightGBM (0.825); all three significantly outperformed penalized logistic regression (0.722; DeLong p ≤ 0.013). Random forest was well calibrated (slope 1.099, Brier 0.098) and showed positive net benefit across clinically relevant thresholds. Discrimination remained high after removing preoperative HCT (AUC: 0.828), indicating a multivariable signal. Preoperative HCT, caliceal access site, and stone size were the most influential predictors. Conclusion: Ensemble machine-learning models can predict postoperative bleeding after mini-PCNL with good, well-calibrated discrimination from preoperative variables alone, outperforming conventional logistic regression. External, temporal, and prospective validation are required before routine clinical use.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sekkeli et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: