AI-Automated Risk Operative Stratification for Severe Aortic Stenosis: A Proof-of-Concept Study

<b>Background</b>: Accurate operative risk stratification is essential for treatment selection in severe aortic stenosis. We developed an automated workflow using large language models (LLMs) to replicate Heart Team risk assessment. <b>Methods</b>: We retrospectively analyzed 231 consecutive patients with severe aortic stenosis evaluated by multidisciplinary Heart Teams (January 2022-December 2024). An automated system using GPT-4o was developed, comprising the following: (1) structured data extraction from clinical dossiers; (2) EuroSCORE II calculation via two methods (algorithmic vs. LLM-based); (3) clinical vignette generation; and (4) risk stratification comparing EuroSCORE-based thresholds versus guideline-integrated LLM approaches with/without EuroSCORE values. The primary endpoint was the risk stratification accuracy of each method compared to Heart Team decisions. <b>Results:</b> Mean age was 79.5 ± 7.7 years, with 58.4% female. The automated workflow processed patients in 32.6 ± 6.4 s. The LLM-calculated EuroSCORE II showed a lower mean difference from Heart Team values (-1.42%, 95% CI -2.32 to -0.53) versus algorithmic calculation (-1.88%, 95% CI -2.38 to -1.38). For risk stratification, the guideline-integrated LLM without EuroSCORE achieved the highest accuracy (90.0%) and AUC (0.93), outperforming both the EuroSCORE-based (accuracy 50.2% for high-risk, AUC 0.63) and guideline-integrated LLM with EuroSCORE approaches (accuracy 82.4%, AUC 0.76). However, systematic hallucinations occurred for cardiovascular risk factors when data were missing. <b>Conclusions:</b> LLMs accurately calculated EuroSCORE II and achieved 90% concordance with multidisciplinary Heart Team decisions. However, hallucinations, reproducibility concerns, and the absence of clinical outcome validation preclude direct clinical application.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Clinical Medicine
Published
2025-11-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14238304
Primary Topic
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

AI-Automated Risk Operative Stratification for Severe Aortic Stenosis: A Proof-of-Concept Study

Pascal Meier, Mario Togni, Ioannis Skalidis, D. Garín et al.
Journal of Clinical Medicine
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
article

AI-Automated Risk Operative Stratification for Severe Aortic Stenosis: A Proof-of-Concept Study

Pascal Meier, Mario Togni, Ioannis Skalidis, D. Garín, Stéphane Cook, Charlie Ferry, Philippe di Cicco, Serban Puricel, Diego Arroyo, Wesley Bennar
article en

Abstract

<b>Background</b>: Accurate operative risk stratification is essential for treatment selection in severe aortic stenosis. We developed an automated workflow using large language models (LLMs) to replicate Heart Team risk assessment. <b>Methods</b>: We retrospectively analyzed 231 consecutive patients with severe aortic stenosis evaluated by multidisciplinary Heart Teams (January 2022-December 2024). An automated system using GPT-4o was developed, comprising the following: (1) structured data extraction from clinical dossiers; (2) EuroSCORE II calculation via two methods (algorithmic vs. LLM-based); (3) clinical vignette generation; and (4) risk stratification comparing EuroSCORE-based thresholds versus guideline-integrated LLM approaches with/without EuroSCORE values. The primary endpoint was the risk stratification accuracy of each method compared to Heart Team decisions. <b>Results:</b> Mean age was 79.5 ± 7.7 years, with 58.4% female. The automated workflow processed patients in 32.6 ± 6.4 s. The LLM-calculated EuroSCORE II showed a lower mean difference from Heart Team values (-1.42%, 95% CI -2.32 to -0.53) versus algorithmic calculation (-1.88%, 95% CI -2.38 to -1.38). For risk stratification, the guideline-integrated LLM without EuroSCORE achieved the highest accuracy (90.0%) and AUC (0.93), outperforming both the EuroSCORE-based (accuracy 50.2% for high-risk, AUC 0.63) and guideline-integrated LLM with EuroSCORE approaches (accuracy 82.4%, AUC 0.76). However, systematic hallucinations occurred for cardiovascular risk factors when data were missing. <b>Conclusions:</b> LLMs accurately calculated EuroSCORE II and achieved 90% concordance with multidisciplinary Heart Team decisions. However, hallucinations, reproducibility concerns, and the absence of clinical outcome validation preclude direct clinical application.

Journal of Clinical MedicineVol. 14(23)
University of Geneva (CH), University of Fribourg (CH), HES-SO Genève (CH), University Hospital of Geneva (CH), Geneva College (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 70%
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.