Open access peer-reviewed chapter - ONLINE FIRST

Artificial Intelligence in Organ Transplantation: Surveying Current Applications, Addressing Challenges and Exploring Frontiers

Written By

Badi Rawashdeh

Submitted: 22 January 2024 Reviewed: 23 February 2024 Published: 12 April 2024

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.114356

Artificial Intelligence in Medicine and Surgery - An Exploration of Current Trends, Potential Opportunities, and Evolving Threats - Volume 2 IntechOpen
Artificial Intelligence in Medicine and Surgery - An Exploration ... Edited by Stanislaw P. Stawicki

From the Edited Volume

Artificial Intelligence in Medicine and Surgery - An Exploration of Current Trends, Potential Opportunities, and Evolving Threats - Volume 2 [Working Title]

Dr. Stanislaw P. Stawicki

Chapter metrics overview

12 Chapter Downloads

View Full Metrics

Abstract

This chapter explores the crucial intersection of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) in the field of solid organ transplantation, which is encountering significant hurdles such as organ shortage and the necessity for enhanced donor-recipient matching. This chapter highlights innovative applications of AI and ML to improve decision-making processes, optimize organ allocation, and enhance patient outcomes after transplantation. The research explores the ability of AI and ML to analyze intricate variables and forecast outcomes with exceptional precision, using extensive datasets from the Web of Science and PubMed. The discussion focuses on the transformative potential of technologies in transplantation, as well as ethical considerations and the importance of transparent approaches. The in-depth look shows how AI and ML are changing transplantation, offering substantial improvements in patient care and operational efficiency.

Keywords

  • artificial intelligence
  • machine learning
  • organ transplantation
  • applications
  • challenges

1. Introduction

1.1 The critical role of solid organ transplantation

Solid organ transplantation is a critical medical procedure that serves as a life-saving intervention for individuals who are afflicted with end-stage organ diseases [1]. Nevertheless, a notable obstacle that casts a shadow over this medical advancement is the increasing disparity between the availability and need for organs [1]. The persistent challenge of organ shortage has resulted in a significant disparity between the number of patients on waiting lists and the limited supply of organs [2]. The demand for transplantation has been heightened due to various factors, including an aging population, a rise in chronic diseases, and advancements in medical techniques that enable a wider range of patients to be eligible for transplantation [3]. The existing discrepancy not only leads to extended waiting periods for patients in critical condition but also contributes to heightened rates of morbidity and death among patients on the waiting list [4]. Hence, the process of making decisions regarding transplantation assumes heightened significance, as it is influenced by a confluence of clinical, logistical, and ethical factors. Given the urgent need for donor organs and the limited supply, it is crucial to make precise and prompt decisions. The aforementioned tasks involve the evaluation of patient risks, the facilitation of an ideal match between donors and recipients, and the assessment of outcomes following transplantation.

1.2 Innovations through artificial intelligence

Artificial intelligence (AI) is a modern approach that differs from traditional statistical methods [5, 6]. It can handle complicated datasets with effectiveness because it can consider several variables at once [7]. This attribute is particularly vital in the field of solid organ transplantation, where conventional statistical methods may not suffice in offering comprehensive evaluations of diverse outcome measures, particularly intricate events such as graft loss. The complexity of the variables influencing transplant outcomes highlights the shortcomings of conventional methods.

AI presents a groundbreaking method that enhances decision-making in the field of medicine by offering advanced computational tools [5, 6]. The capacity to analyze extensive and intricate datasets permits a comprehensive assessment of diverse variables, facilitating a nuanced comprehension of complex medical situations [8]. Within the realm of transplantation, where the compatibility between the donor and recipient, immunological factors, and the recovery paths after surgery are interconnected, the computational abilities of AI become essential [8]. It not only improves the accuracy of predictions but also reveals intricate patterns and correlations that traditional statistical models may fail to detect [8, 9].

The incorporation of AI into the complex field of solid organ transplantation is a revolutionary component of contemporary medical practice [10, 11]. The importance of AI in this domain stems from its advanced algorithms and profound capacity for deep learning, allowing for the efficient analysis of vast and intricate datasets [12]. Given the inherent complexity of datasets associated with organ transplants, which include genetic information, immunological markers, metrics for donor-recipient compatibility, and post-surgery recovery trajectories, AI’s transformative potential becomes even clearer [12].

The fact that every organ type presents its own unique set of challenges and factors to take into account makes it necessary to develop individualized analytical approaches. AI has played a crucial role in dealing with this complexity [12]. AI Showed promise in enhancing organ allocation [13], monitoring rejections, and optimizing treatment [14, 15]. It also enhances research by detecting patterns in datasets, promoting personalized medicine approaches [16]. AI also provides predictive analyses of post-transplant outcomes, identifying individuals at higher risk of complications or graft failure [17]. This allows for proactive interventions and customized treatment, improving patient care and the long-term success of transplantation procedures.

1.3 Ethical considerations and accountability in AI integration

As the integration of AI becomes more pervasive in the realm of organ transplantation, ethical considerations come to the forefront [12, 18]. In navigating this intersection of technology and healthcare, transparent and accountable practices are paramount [5, 19]. The responsible implementation of AI technologies demands robust frameworks that address concerns related to privacy, security, and the potential biases inherent in algorithms [8]. Ensuring transparency in the decision-making processes of AI systems is crucial to building trust among healthcare professionals, patients, and the broader public [8].

Moreover, discussions surrounding accountability become integral to establishing a framework where the roles and responsibilities of AI systems and human practitioners are clearly defined. This is particularly relevant in the context of critical decisions, such as organ allocation and treatment plans, where the ethical ramifications of AI-informed choices need careful consideration [20, 21]. Additionally, addressing biases in AI algorithms is imperative to avoid perpetuating disparities in healthcare outcomes based on factors such as race, gender, or socioeconomic status. Striking a balance between harnessing the potential of AI for improved healthcare and mitigating ethical concerns requires ongoing dialog and collaboration among medical professionals, technologists, ethicists, and policymakers [22].

Advertisement

2. Method

This chapter’s research is supported by a thorough examination of literature and studies obtained from the Web of Science and PubMed databases. The databases were chosen for their extensive coverage of peer-reviewed medical and scientific publications. The search strategy concentrated on finding papers that explore the utilization of AI and ML in the field of solid organ transplantation, encompassing kidney, liver, heart, and lung transplants. Terms like “artificial intelligence,” “machine learning,” “solid organ transplantation,” “donor-recipient matching,” and “post-transplant outcomes” were employed. The inclusion criteria focused on studies that specifically examine the application of AI and ML algorithms to enhance transplantation processes, spanning from pre-transplant evaluation to post-transplant treatment. The literature review aimed to summarize research findings on how AI and ML can improve the accuracy of organ allocation, predict transplantation results, and recognize ethical and implementation challenges.

Advertisement

3. Machine learning

Machine learning (ML) is a subset of AI that emphasizes creating algorithms and models with the ability to learn and make predictions or decisions without the need for explicit programming [23, 24]. Computers are empowered to analyze vast amounts of data, detect patterns, and acquire knowledge from examples or experiences to enhance performance on specific tasks [25].

The medical field has extensively employed ML, resulting in a substantial transformation in healthcare practices [23, 25]. ML algorithms have been used in medical diagnostics to analyze medical imaging data, including X-rays, Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), and Computed Tomography (CT) scans, aiding in the detection and classification of diseases [26]. ML models have also been employed for predicting patient outcomes [27], including mortality rates [28], treatment response [29], and disease progression [30], using clinical data and patient characteristics. Moreover, ML has expedited the advancement of personalized medicine, allowing for customized treatment strategies that take into account specific patient factors [31].

ML, an innovative technology with the capacity to transform multiple medical domains, has become an effective tool in transplantation [12]. It is particularly useful for predicting post-transplant outcomes and offering invaluable knowledge about patient prognosis [24, 25, 32, 33]. Through the examination of patient’s data, which includes factors that increase the likelihood of complications before a transplant and any complications that occur after the transplant, ML models provide valuable predictive information. This information assists clinicians in identifying patients who have a greater chance of experiencing complications or graft failure [34]. The ability to predict outcomes allows for proactive interventions and customized treatment plans, resulting in enhanced patient care and increased long-term success rates for transplants [12, 35, 36]. In this setting, the utilization of ML involves two primary methods: algorithmic models to determine the duration of post-transplant graft and patient survival, and classification techniques to evaluate whether donor-recipient pairs exceed certain posttransplant milestones based on the recipient’s most recent follow-up [5, 12, 24, 35].

In contrast to conventional statistical techniques and regression analysis, ML provides the capacity to manage intricate datasets by integrating multiple variables for the analysis of diverse medical end-points, encompassing both positive and negative results [37]. This is especially pertinent in fields such as transplantation, where outcomes such as graft loss may not be accurately estimated by conventional statistical methods found in the literature [38]. Although intricate, these computational tools show potential in enhancing comprehension of intricate medical situations and enabling more knowledgeable and accurate decision-making in transplantation and other medical fields [12, 39].

Advertisement

4. Machine learning algorithms

ML algorithms employ a variety of statistical, probabilistic and optimization methods to learn from past experience and detect useful patterns from large, unstructured and complex dataset [5]. ML algorithms can be broadly categorized into three main types based on their learning approach to supervised learning, unsupervised learning, and reinforcement learning [25].

In supervised learning, the algorithm learns from labeled data, where the input features and their corresponding target outputs are provided. The goal is to learn a mapping between inputs and outputs so that the algorithm can make accurate predictions on new, unseen data. Common algorithms in this category include Support Vector Machines (SVM), Decision Trees, Random Forests, Naïve Bayes and Neural Networks. Supervised learning is commonly used for tasks like classification, where the algorithm assigns a label to input data, and regression, where it predicts a continuous value [40].

Unsupervised learning algorithms work with unlabeled data, meaning the target outputs are not provided during training. The algorithm seeks to identify patterns or structures within the data without explicit guidance. Clustering and dimensionality reduction are typical tasks in unsupervised learning. K-Means, Hierarchical Clustering, Principal Component Analysis (PCA), and Autoencoders are examples of unsupervised learning algorithms [41].

Reinforcement learning is distinct from supervised and unsupervised learning as it does not require labeled input/output pairs for training and does not explicitly correct sub-optimal actions. Instead, it focuses on striking a balance between exploring new possibilities and exploiting existing knowledge it involves an agent learning from interactions with an environment to achieve specific goals. The agent takes actions, receives feedback from the environment in the form of re wards or penalties, and adjusts its behavior to maximize the cumulative reward. Reinforcement learning is commonly used in scenarios where the optimal decision-making strategy is not known in advance. Q-Learning, Deep Q Networks (DQN), and Policy Gradient Methods are popular reinforcement learning algorithms [42].

Each type of ML algorithm has its unique strengths and weaknesses, and the choice of algorithm depends on the nature of the problem and the available data. Most of the ML applications have been implemented using supervised variants of the ML algorithms rather than unsupervised ones. In the supervised variant, a prediction model is developed by learning a dataset where the label is known and accordingly the outcome of unlabeled examples can be predicted [24, 25].

Advertisement

5. Applications in organ transplantation

The application of AI techniques in the field of solid organ transplantation has seen significant advancements in recent years. During the pre-transplant phase, AI has become a valuable tool in the field of transplantation, with the potential to enhance patient outcomes and optimize organ allocation [12]. AI algorithms have been employed to create predictive models that evaluate the appropriateness of potential organ donors and pair them with suitable recipients. These models consider factors such as compatibility between the donor and recipient, the quality of the organ, and the medical characteristics of the recipient [43, 44, 45]. These models assist transplant programs in making well-informed decisions and optimizing the likelihood of successful transplantations [12]. These models improved the allocation of organs by taking into account various factors including logistics, recipient urgency, and disparities [13]. The intelligent approach proposed guarantees a more equitable and streamlined allocation of organs, taking into consideration the intricacies linked to various organ categories.

During the post-transplant period, AI plays a significant role in the ongoing investigation, the prompt identification of complications, the detection of instances of rejection [15], the optimization of immunosuppressive drug dosages [46], and the improvement of healthcare standards after transplantation [18]. Furthermore, by finding patterns and correlations in large datasets, AI supports ongoing research efforts and advances personalized medicine and treatment modalities [16]. AI also shows promise in the field of transplantation by offering prognostic analyses and predictive analyses of post-transplant outcomes [47]. AI models identify patients who are more likely to experience complications or graft failure by analyzing historical patient data [17]. This allows for tailored treatment plans and early interventions to improve patient outcomes and ensure long-term transplant success.

Advertisement

6. Kidney transplantation

Highlighting the profound influence of AI, the field of kidney transplantation serves as a notable example of how AI can be quickly incorporated into the wider scope of solid organ transplantation medicine. The rapid increase in data volume in the field, combined with the remarkable ability of AI algorithms to collect and analyze large datasets, has accelerated the use of AI in systems aimed at enhancing clinical decision-making in kidney transplantation [48].

The incorporation of AI algorithms in the field of kidney transplantation, is seen as a vital element for enhancing healthcare management, tackling the difficulties presented by a large number of dialysis patients and a restricted supply of organ donors [49]. These algorithms, which employ data mining and neural network techniques, play a role in advancing complex e-health systems designed for strategic organ allocation and predicting transplant outcomes [50].

Beyond its influence in many different fields of medicine, AI has left a significant impact on the kidney transplant field [51]. It has significantly enhanced our ability to match kidney donors and recipients with precision [52, 53], predict kidney graft survival with previously unobtainable accuracy [49], diagnose rejection, optimize immunosuppressive dosage, and provide post-transplant care [7], and enable a more thorough and prognostic approach to patient care throughout the transplant process [8, 48].

Specifically, Ravikumar et al. [33] applied the support vector machine (SVM) technique to enhance donor-recipient matching, maximizing the chances of graft survival. These studies exemplify how ML contributes to better outcomes in kidney transplantation. Additionally, Shadabi et al. [50] utilized an ensemble of Artificial Neural Network (ANN) to estimate the probability of graft survival after a certain period following transplantation.

AI’s influence on KT is particularly notable in its capacity to predict graft rejection. Preliminary research conducted over a period of 20 years has investigated the effectiveness of neural networks in predicting chronic renal allograft rejection. These studies have demonstrated encouraging outcomes in retrospective analyses [54]. Nevertheless, despite these progressions, there is presently no established protocol endorsing the integration of AI in the process of organ allocation or prediction of rejection.

Serum creatinine is a crucial measure for evaluating the function of a transplanted kidney. AI, specifically using dynamic time warping (DTW), has been employed to identify abnormal patterns and detect early indications of acute rejection [55]. The incorporation of AI into electronic patient registration systems shows potential for a systematic assessment of its influence on the care of transplant recipients.

Retrospective studies utilizing AI techniques, such as Multilayer Perceptron’s (MLPs) and decision trees, have played a crucial role in detecting delayed recovery of transplanted kidney function and identifying individuals who are at risk of graft loss [56, 57]. In addition, ML software utilizing Bayesian belief network (BBN) has been created as a tool for pretransplant organ matching. This software has the ability to predict graft failure within the first year with a specificity of 80% [47]. The smooth incorporation of these AI tools into electronic health records indicates a future of significant change in the management of kidney transplants [18, 58, 59].

Recent studies have primarily focused on utilizing different ML models to predict the optimal dosage of tacrolimus in posttransplant immunosuppressive therapy [60]. The utilization of genetic factors and ANN calculations in a prospective study of 129 kidney transplant patients demonstrates the capability of AI to accurately determine the initial tacrolimus dosage. This advancement has the potential to enhance therapy outcomes and mitigate the risk of tacrolimus toxicity [46].

Furthermore, ANN proved to be a suitable method for investigating posttransplant diets in a randomized controlled trial that involved multiple interconnected variables with nonlinear relationships. The study, which included 37 kidney transplant patients, randomly assigned them to either a low-fat standard diet or a Mediterranean diet. The study concluded that the Mediterranean diet would be the most suitable for posttransplant patients without having any impact on their lipid profile [61]. This highlights the capacity of AI, specifically ANN, to offer a thorough strategy for addressing biological issues within the field of kidney transplantation. The future is poised to witness a significant and impactful integration of AI technologies into various facets of kidney transplant management.

Advertisement

7. Liver transplantation

The liver transplant community, like other solid organ transplant communities, has consistently encountered a significant obstacle: an expanding disparity between the rising number of transplant candidates and the limited availability of donor grafts [62]. The urgent requirement for solutions has triggered a surge of research into state-of-the-art technologies, with a focus on enhancing existing allocation systems and refining transplant risk assessments [63, 64]. AI, specifically ML algorithms, has become highly effective in enhancing clinical decision-making in liver transplantation. They achieve this by effectively analyzing extensive datasets to identify complex connections between donor and recipient characteristics [5, 64].

Given the critical shortage of organs, it is crucial to accurately predict and identify risks and outcomes [5, 63]. The proficiency of AI in generating intricate prediction models that precisely forecast patient outcomes showcases its exceptional performance [5]. In addition, the utilization of AI in assessing grafts and matching donors with recipients has the potential to bring about significant advancements in the allocation system. The ultimate objective is to expedite transplantation procedures and improve overall outcomes [5, 65]. Traditional models like SOFT or BAR scores often face challenges when accurately representing the complexities associated with donor-recipient matching [5]. However, AI algorithms effectively handle these complexities with their intelligence, ensuring more accurate matches [64].

ML tools are crucial for tailoring patient care following a transplant [66]. These tools aim to offer personalized post-transplant care by analyzing data dynamics and variations. ML models utilizing pre-transplant data outperform conventional biostatistical models in accurately predicting patient survival following transplantation [5, 66, 67]. These insights can streamline the process of allocating organs to candidates who are anticipated to achieve optimal outcomes [43]. ML techniques, such as convolutional neural networks and gradient-boosting machines, have proven to be effective in predicting and minimizing complications after liver transplantation [3566]. Consequently, we expect that the skillful integration of AI will lead to enhanced patient outcomes and effective management of transplant challenges.

The outcome of liver transplantation is heavily dependent on the compatibility and efficacy of the donor-recipient match. Briceño et al. introduced a novel model for matching donors and recipients by utilizing two ANN models, acknowledging the crucial nature of this aspect [68]. They proposed an innovative model for donor-recipient matching using two ANN models. The first ANN aimed to increase the likelihood of graft survival, while the second ANN focused on decreasing the probability of graft loss. By employing a dataset comprising over 1000 pairs of donor-recipient combinations and considering 64 variables related to donors, recipients, and transplantation processes, they sought to create a powerful decision-making system that optimizes principles of fairness, efficiency, and equity, ultimately benefiting liver transplantation outcomes. Following this line of research, several other studies have utilized ML algorithms to predict various aspects of organ transplantation, ranging from mortality on the waitlist to post-transplant outcomes [45, 62, 69].

In more recent studies, several ML algorithms have been applied to predict outcomes in the context of liver transplantation. Nagai et al. [70] developed ANN algorithm for the prediction of 90-day liver transplant waitlist mortality, achieving an Area Under The Receiver-Operating Characteristic Curve (AUROC) of 0.936. Using a subset of patients listed for transplant between 2002 and 2021 from the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network/United Network for Organ Sharing registry, they included 105,140 patients split into training, validation, and test datasets. The ANN 90-day mortality model outperformed MELD-based models across all subsets in predicting mortality. Similarly, Bertsimas et al. [71] proposed an “optimized prediction of mortality” (OPOM) model using optimal classification trees to predict 90-day waitlist mortality. The OPOM model demonstrated a potential reduction in the waitlist mortality rate and an AUROC of 0.859 compared to 0.841 for the MELD-Na model.

Moving beyond the 90-day prediction horizon, ML models have also been explored to predict 1-year mortality in cirrhosis patients. Kanwal et al. [72] developed three ML models using extreme gradient descent boosting, logistic regression (LR) with LASSO regularization, and a limited logistic regression model. They included 107,939 patients with cirrhosis and achieved an AUROC of 0.78 for 1-year mortality prediction. Guo et al. [73] compared deep neural networks (DNNs), random forest (RF), and LR models, and their DNN and RF models achieved AUROCs of 0.85–0.86, outperforming the LR model (AUROC 0.69) for 1-year mortality prediction. Lastly, Kwong et al. [69] developed a RF model for predicting waitlist dropout in hepatocellular carcinoma patients listed for transplant, achieving a concordance statistic of 0.74 for 3-, 6-, and 12-month waitlist dropout prediction using 12 predictive features. These studies showcase the growing role of ML algorithms in improving outcome prediction in the field of liver transplantation, offering valuable insights and potential benefits for liver transplant patient management.

Advertisement

8. Heart and lung transplantation

In the context of thoracic organ transplantation, researchers have turned to ML techniques to improve decision-making and predict critical outcomes. Delen et al. [32] used thoracic transplantation database obtained from United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) and applied Support Vector Regressor (SVR), MultiLayer Perceptron (MLP), and regression trees to predict the number of days from transplant to death or last follow-up, achieving effective results. Moreover, Oztekin et al. [74] developed a hybrid methodology using Genetic Algorithms for feature selection, and various ML algorithms were used to predict patients’ Quality of Life (QoL) after a lung transplant. Among them, GA-SVM demonstrated the best performance in predicting QoL categories. These studies demonstrate the potential of ML to provide valuable insights and enhance patient outcomes in thoracic organ transplantation.

Specifically, AI is crucial in the field of heart transplantation as it utilizes ML and deep learning techniques to improve diagnostics, optimize matching between donors and recipients for better prognosis, predict survival after heart transplantation, and enhance the monitoring of levels of immunosuppressive drugs [75]. The utilization of AI is becoming a powerful and influential factor, offering valuable knowledge and enhancing the accuracy of medical practices in the domain of heart transplantation.

Garcia-Canadilla et al. conducted a comprehensive study in 2022 [76] that showcased the capacity of ML to enhance the precision of identifying familial/genetic patterns in dilated cardiomyopathy and forecasting the prognosis of pediatric individuals eligible for heart transplantation. Kienzl et al. [77] discovered protein spots linked to the initial stages of acute heart transplantation rejection in animal models, which opened up possibilities for new pathophysiological and diagnostic models. Additional research has investigated the application of deep learning in automatically identifying tissue characteristics associated with allograft rejection [15, 78].

In parallel efforts to advance diagnostics, Castellani et al. employed ML techniques to improve diagnostic tools for allograft rejection, focusing on analyzing the surface protein profiles of plasma-derived extracellular vesicles [79]. Peyster et al. presented the ‘Computer-Assisted Cardiac Histologic Evaluation (CACHE)-Grader’ pipeline, showcasing its ability to automatically evaluate cellular rejection for diagnostic purposes [80]. Furthermore, Wei et al. utilized ML techniques to analyze urinary proteomics data in order to identify potential markers of allograft rejection [81].

Transitioning to the realm of prognosis post- heart transplantation, Oztekin et al. utilized ANNs to forecast the survival rates following heart-lung transplantation [82]. Their findings unveiled previously unrecognized connections between variables that were not taken into account in traditional models. Delen et al. employed ML techniques to determine the prognosis of thoracic organ transplantations, surpassing the constraints of conventional statistical methods [32]. Nilsson et al. conducted a comparison between current scoring models and an algorithm based on AI, demonstrating exceptional accuracy and uncovering valuable insights related to donors [83].

According to Another study, ML methods were found to be more dependable than traditional methods in predicting longer post- heart transplantation survival [84]. This highlights the change in AI research from focusing on allograft rejection to improving prognosis. In 2018, Yoon et al. employed a trees-of-predictors approach to personalize the prediction of survival [85]; however, in 2019, Kransdorf et al. conducted a study to improve the survival rates after heart transplantation by optimizing the matching of donor and recipient based on their physical measurements [86].

Building on this, Agasthi et al. conducted a study in 2020 where they analyzed more than 300 variables in 15,236 patients who underwent heart transplantation using ML, the study revealed that the variables with the greatest impact on predicting 5-year mortality and graft failure were the length of stay, recipient and donor age, recipient and donor body mass index, and ischemic time. The overall accuracy of the predictions was 71% [87]. Conversely, Hsich et al. discovered intricate relationships that can predict mortality at different stages (early, mid, and late) in adults [88]. On the other hand, Ayers et al. achieved an accuracy rate of approximately 76% in predicting mortality [89].

In further exploration, Zhou et al. demonstrated an 80% accuracy in predicting survival 1 year after heart transplantation at a single center in China using ML [90]. ML-based techniques were found to be essential in analyzing various data sources to enhance the utilization of organs and improve long-term outcomes after heart transplantation.

Zafar et al. [14] model improved the accuracy of risk prediction for lung transplantation by integrating recipient, donor, and transplant-related factors into a comprehensive model for recipient-donor matching. The researchers utilized data from the UNOS Registry spanning from 2005 to 2020 to create a risk scoring tool. This tool was developed using a group of individuals aged 12 years and older who had undergone double lung transplantation. The cohort was partitioned into derivation and validation sets, wherein 42 factors were examined using the Lasso method to select variables. The resultant model, based on 13 recipient, 4 donor, and 2 transplant variables, exhibited precise survival estimations in both the derivation and validation cohorts. The web-based application that has been created offers real-time matching based on risk, providing survival probabilities for low, medium, and high-risk clusters in both the short and long term. The study demonstrates the effectiveness of advanced machine/deep learning techniques in enhancing recipient-donor matching and maximizing the use of scarce donor resources in lung transplantation.

ML techniques have also been explored in the context of pediatric transplantation. For example, a study [91] applied Random Forest with conditional inference trees to determine the impact of specific donor variables on pediatric liver transplantation. Meanwhile, Miller et al. [92] evaluated various machine-learning algorithms, including ANN, decision tree, and random forest, to predict mortality following pediatric heart transplants. These studies highlight the potential of ML to improve outcomes in diverse transplantation scenarios and its ability to contribute to the advancement of organ transplantation medicine. Despite certain challenges such as small data sizes and missing information, ongoing research in the field holds promise for revolutionizing transplantation practices and enhancing patient care.

Overall, the use of ML methods in organ transplantation research holds promise for enhancing prediction accuracy and decision-making processes, providing valuable tools for medical practitioners and optimizing transplantation outcomes. However, further research and standardization of methodologies are essential to harness the full potential of these techniques and address the unique challenges presented in each transplantation scenario.

Advertisement

9. Challenges

Although there are potential advantages to AI in the context of organ transplantation, there are also a number of challenges [39, 45]. The data quality, model security and consistency of the data utilized in modeling are major causes of concern [20, 21, 93, 94]. Furthermore, Small sample sizes, variability between transplant centers, and inconsistent data collection can limit the generalizability of a model and introduce potential biases [20, 21, 45, 93, 94]. Numerous models lack perspective and external validation, highlighting the need for post-implementation monitoring and careful external validation in diverse cohorts or simulated data [45].

Furthermore, it is critical to include both clinical and non-clinical characteristics in research to ensure equal transplantation outcomes. Results can be considerably influenced by variables like geographic disparity, physical compatibility between donors and recipients, and the availability of resources. Depending on how the ML model is developed, certain important population segments might not be well represented, which could result in biased predictions [45].

Beyond the data itself, there are challenges in translating ML results into actionable clinical insights. While ML might identify patterns, the clinical or biological reasoning behind them might be elusive, making it imperative for results to be both accurate and interpretable [45]. This demand is exacerbated by the necessity of real-time predictions in certain transplant scenarios. Additionally, a model’s performance can differ based on the patient demographic it’s applied to. Thus, a model trained on one demographic might not be universally applicable, emphasizing the need for rigorous validation on independent datasets [20, 39, 93]. Also, the potential bottlenecks created from implementing ML include the massive learning curve from health-care workers. However, with recent advances, many ML libraries are developing easy-to-access functions to increase interpretability [94].

Despite the considerable progress made in the integration of AI into the field of kidney transplantation, there remain noteworthy obstacles that restrict its widespread implementation [48, 51]. Seyahi et al. proposed that healthcare professionals express skepticism towards AI algorithms due to their limited transparency, which hinders their understanding of how these algorithms operate [7]. In addition, the availability of real-time applications for matching donor grafts with recipients is limited. These applications have the potential to optimize the advantages of transplantation by considering factors such as age, donor type, and the medical history of both the donor and potential recipient. Furthermore, the field currently exhibits a deficiency in long-term outcome predictions, which necessitates future studies to address this gap.

The incorporation of AI into the field of liver transplantation has made significant advancements; however, there are still ongoing challenges that need to be addressed [66, 94]. The data pertaining to liver transplantation frequently display notable variations, a dearth of standardized structures, and the inclusion of subjective elements [5, 94]. Healthcare professionals may develop skepticism due to the inherent opaqueness of specific AI algorithms. Furthermore, it is currently evident that there exists a deficiency in the ability to accurately forecast long-term outcomes [22]. As a result, it is imperative that future efforts be undertaken to address and rectify this gap in knowledge.

Advertisement

10. Emerging frontiers

The intersection of AI and solid organ transplantation is a highly promising convergence. With the advancement of technology and the availability of extensive datasets, the field of AI-driven insights in transplantation is emerging as a promising and yet-to-be-discovered area for further research and innovation.

10.1 Predictive analytics

The advanced predictive algorithms of ML show great potential, suggesting a significant and positive effect on the process of organ allocation in the coming years. These algorithms are expected to greatly improve the accuracy of determining whether a recipient is matched with specific organ donors, surpassing current traditional allocation methods [8, 65]. By utilizing a wide range of factors and examining their intricate relationships, this developing approach has the potential to enhance the entire process of allocating organs. Furthermore, within the context of post-transplant settings, ML models are advancing to predict personalized short-term outcomes for patients, with ongoing efforts expected in the evaluation of long-term outcomes. Although significant progress has been achieved, it is essential to incorporate additional patient data into AI research and algorithms to enhance the accuracy of predictive outcomes.

10.2 Advanced imaging, transplant pathology, and personalized medicine

The application of ML has been of critical importance in the field of medical image analysis, particularly in its more specialized areas. Anticipated advancements in transplantation hold great promise, as they have the potential to revolutionize organ selection and improve the accuracy of matching and allocation. The incorporation of AI has become critical in transplant pathology, addressing the scarcity of pathologists skilled in identifying complex patterns. Recent research emphasizes the capacity of AI to retrieve vital information from images, surpassing human experts in specific domains like diagnosing kidney allograft rejection. The introduction of digital pathology slide scanners amplifies the impact of AI in this field. Considerable advancements have been made in the field of transplant pathology, with the expectation of further improvement through the development of accurate algorithms. These algorithms will aid in the identification of organ rejection and the assessment of organ quality, particularly for the liver, by analyzing biopsy slides, even during the procurement phase. This advancement has the potential to significantly contribute to the distribution and approval of marginal organs in the field of organ transplantation. The profound impact of AI on transplant pathology is evidenced by ongoing research, underscoring the potential of these algorithms to greatly enhance the entirety of the organ transplantation procedure.

Within the current context of personalized medicine, the field of transplantation is poised to make substantial progress. When one imagines a future where AI and cutting-edge biomedicine converge, it is not implausible that providers will create individualized immunosuppressive regimens based on each recipient’s distinct personality traits. These highly accurate techniques possess the capacity to diminish adverse reactions and decrease rates of organ rejection. In addition, conducting more comprehensive research in this area can aid in improving the precision of personalized treatment for individuals who have undergone transplantation, thereby enhancing the overall efficacy of transplant therapies.

11. Conclusion

Incorporating AI and ML into solid organ transplantation is a major advancement in the field of medicine. These technologies can potentially address persistent challenges like organ shortages, allocation inefficiencies, and forecasting post-transplant results. AI and ML can reveal patterns and insights in transplantation dynamics that traditional methods could have overlooked by using complex datasets and advanced analytical techniques. As these technologies become more integrated into clinical practices, it is crucial to address ethical considerations and ensure transparent, fair, and responsible use of AI. The future of organ transplantation depends on integrating technological advancements while maintaining the highest ethical standards, with artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) playing crucial roles in influencing the field of transplantation.

References

  1. 1. Ortega F. Organ transplantation in the 21th century. Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology. 2012;741:13-26
  2. 2. Feng S. Donor intervention and organ preservation: Where is the science and what are the obstacles? American Journal of Transplantation. 2010;10(5):1155-1162
  3. 3. Kniepeiss D, Wagner D, Pienaar S, Thaler HW, Porubsky C, Tscheliessnigg KH, et al. Solid organ transplantation: Technical progress meets human dignity: A review of the literature considering elderly patients' health related quality of life following transplantation. Ageing Research Reviews. 2012;11(1):181-187
  4. 4. Kao J, Reid N, Hubbard RE, Homes R, Hanjani LS, Pearson E, et al. Frailty and solid-organ transplant candidates: A scoping review. BMC Geriatrics. 2022;22(1):864
  5. 5. Bhat M, Rabindranath M, Chara BS, Simonetto DA. Artificial intelligence, machine learning, and deep learning in liver transplantation. Journal of Hepatology. 2023;78(6):1216-1233
  6. 6. Zhou LQ , Wang JY, Yu SY, Wu GG, Wei Q , Deng YB, et al. Artificial intelligence in medical imaging of the liver. World Journal of Gastroenterology. 2019;25(6):672-682
  7. 7. Seyahi N, Ozcan SG. Artificial intelligence and kidney transplantation. World Journal of Transplantation. 2021;11(7):277-289
  8. 8. Peloso A, Moeckli B, Delaune V, Oldani G, Andres A, Compagnon P. Artificial intelligence: Present and future potential for solid organ transplantation. Transplant International. 2022;35:10640
  9. 9. Sapir-Pichhadze R, Kaplan B. Seeing the forest for the trees: Random forest models for predicting survival in kidney transplant recipients. Transplantation. 2020;104(5):905-906
  10. 10. Rahman MA, Yilmaz I, Albadri ST, Salem FE, Dangott BJ, Taner CB, et al. Artificial intelligence advances in transplant pathology. Bioengineering (Basel). 2023;10(9)
  11. 11. Glass C, Davis R, Xiong B, Dov D, Glass M. The use of artificial intelligence (AI) machine learning to determine myocyte damage in cardiac transplant acute cellular rejection. The Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation. 2020;39(4), S59
  12. 12. Balch JA, Delitto D, Tighe PJ, Zarrinpar A, Efron PA, Rashidi P, et al. Machine learning applications in solid organ transplantation and related complications. Frontiers in Immunology. 2021;12:739728
  13. 13. Accardo C, Vella I, Pagano D, di Francesco F, Li Petri S, Calamia S, et al. Donor-recipient matching in adult liver transplantation: Current status and advances. Bioscience Trends. 2023;17(3):203-210
  14. 14. Zafar F, Hossain MM, Zhang Y, Dani A, Schecter M, Hayes D Jr, et al. Lung transplantation advanced prediction tool: Determining recipient's outcome for a certain donor. Transplantation. 2022;106(10):2019-2030
  15. 15. Tong L, Hoffman R, Deshpande SR, Wang MD. Predicting heart rejection using histopathological whole-slide imaging and deep neural network with dropout. IEEE-EMBS International Conference on Biomedical and Health Informatics. 2017;2017
  16. 16. Tang J, Liu R, Zhang YL, Liu MZ, Hu YF, Shao MJ, et al. Application of machine-learning models to predict tacrolimus stable dose in renal transplant recipients. Scientific Reports. 2017;7:42192
  17. 17. Narayan RR, Abadilla N, Yang L, Chen SB, Klinkachorn M, Eddington HS, et al. Artificial intelligence for prediction of donor liver allograft steatosis and early post-transplantation graft failure. HPB: The Official Journal of the International Hepato Pancreato Biliary Association. 2022;24(5):764-771
  18. 18. Srinivas TR, Taber DJ, Su Z, Zhang J, Mour G, Northrup D, et al. Big data, predictive analytics, and quality improvement in kidney transplantation: A proof of concept. American Journal of Transplantation. 2017;17(3):671-681
  19. 19. Alamgir A, Hussein H, Abdelaal Y, Abd-Alrazaq A, Househ M. Artificial intelligence in kidney transplantation: A scoping review. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics. 2022;294:254-258
  20. 20. Dou B, Zhu Z, Merkurjev E, Ke L, Chen L, Jiang J, et al. Machine learning methods for small data challenges in molecular science. Chemical Reviews. 2023;123(13):8736-8780
  21. 21. Dinsdale NK, Bluemke E, Sundaresan V, Jenkinson M, Smith SM, Namburete AIL. Challenges for machine learning in clinical translation of big data imaging studies. Neuron. 2022;110(23):3866-3881
  22. 22. Briceno J. Artificial intelligence and organ transplantation: Challenges and expectations. Current Opinion in Organ Transplantation. 2020;25(4):393-398
  23. 23. Deo RC. Machine learning in medicine. Circulation. 2015;132(20):1920-1930
  24. 24. Haug CJ, Drazen JM. Artificial intelligence and machine learning in clinical medicine, 2023. The New England Journal of Medicine. 2023;388(13):1201-1208
  25. 25. Choi RY, Coyner AS, Kalpathy-Cramer J, Chiang MF, Campbell JP. Introduction to machine learning, neural networks, and deep learning. Translational Vision Science & Technology. 2020;9(2):14
  26. 26. Currie G, Hawk KE, Rohren E, Vial A, Klein R. Machine learning and deep learning in medical imaging: Intelligent imaging. Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences. 2019;50(4):477-487
  27. 27. Heo J, Yoon JG, Park H, Kim YD, Nam HS, Heo JH. Machine learning-based model for prediction of outcomes in acute stroke. Stroke. 2019;50(5):1263-1265
  28. 28. Moll M, Qiao D, Regan EA, Hunninghake GM, Make BJ, Tal-Singer R, et al. Machine learning and prediction of all-cause mortality in COPD. Chest. 2020;158(3):952-964
  29. 29. Sammut SJ, Crispin-Ortuzar M, Chin SF, Provenzano E, Bardwell HA, Ma W, et al. Multi-omic machine learning predictor of breast cancer therapy response. Nature. 2022;601(7894):623-629
  30. 30. Grueso S, Viejo-Sobera R. Machine learning methods for predicting progression from mild cognitive impairment to Alzheimer's disease dementia: A systematic review. Alzheimer's Research & Therapy. 2021;13(1):162
  31. 31. Cammarota G, Ianiro G, Ahern A, Carbone C, Temko A, Claesson MJ, et al. Gut microbiome, big data and machine learning to promote precision medicine for cancer. Nature Reviews. Gastroenterology & Hepatology. 2020;17(10):635-648
  32. 32. Delen D, Oztekin A, Kong ZJ. A machine learning-based approach to prognostic analysis of thoracic transplantations. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine. 2010;49(1):33-42
  33. 33. Ravikumar A, Saritha R, Chandra V. Support vector machine based prognostic analysis of renal transplantations. In: 2013 Fourth International Conference on Computing, Communications and Networking Technologies (ICCCNT). 2013. pp. 1-6
  34. 34. Lau L, Kankanige Y, Rubinstein B, Jones R, Christophi C, Muralidharan V, et al. Machine-learning algorithms predict graft failure after liver transplantation. Transplantation. 2017;101(4):e125-ee32
  35. 35. Chen C, Chen B, Yang J, Li X, Peng X, Feng Y, et al. Development and validation of a practical machine learning model to predict sepsis after liver transplantation. Annals of Medicine. 2023;55(1):624-633
  36. 36. Fusfeld L, Menon S, Gupta G, Lawrence C, Masud SF, Goss TF. US payer budget impact of a microarray assay with machine learning to evaluate kidney transplant rejection in for-cause biopsies. Journal of Medical Economics. 2022;25(1):515-523
  37. 37. Briceno J, Calleja R, Hervas C. Artificial intelligence and liver transplantation: Looking for the best donor-recipient pairing. Hepatobiliary & Pancreatic Diseases International. 2022;21(4):347-353
  38. 38. Kampaktsis PN, Tzani A, Doulamis IP, Moustakidis S, Drosou A, Diakos N, et al. State-of-the-art machine learning algorithms for the prediction of outcomes after contemporary heart transplantation: Results from the UNOS database. Clinical Transplantation. 2021;35(8):e14388
  39. 39. Guijo-Rubio D, Gutierrez PA, Hervas-Martinez C. Machine learning methods in organ transplantation. Current Opinion in Organ Transplantation. 2020;25(4):399-405
  40. 40. Uddin S, Khan A, Hossain ME, Moni MA. Comparing different supervised machine learning algorithms for disease prediction. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making. 2019;19(1):281
  41. 41. Iqbal T, Elahi A, Wijns W, Shahzad A. Exploring unsupervised machine learning classification methods for physiological stress detection. Frontiers in Medical Technology. 2022;4:782756
  42. 42. Liu E, He R, Chen X, Yu C. Deep reinforcement learning based optical and acoustic dual channel multiple access in heterogeneous underwater sensor networks. Sensors (Basel). 2022;22(4):1628
  43. 43. Vagefi PA, Bertsimas D, Hirose R, Trichakis N. The rise and fall of the model for end-stage liver disease score and the need for an optimized machine learning approach for liver allocation. Current Opinion in Organ Transplantation. 2020;25(2):122-125
  44. 44. Bishara AM, Lituiev DS, Adelmann D, Kothari RP, Malinoski DJ, Nudel JD, et al. Machine learning prediction of liver allograft utilization from deceased organ donors using the National Donor Management Goals Registry. Transplantation direct. 2021;7(10):e771
  45. 45. Gotlieb N, Azhie A, Sharma D, Spann A, Suo NJ, Tran J, et al. The promise of machine learning applications in solid organ transplantation. NPJ Digital Medicine. 2022;5(1):89
  46. 46. Thishya K, Vattam KK, Naushad SM, Raju SB, Kutala VK. Artificial neural network model for predicting the bioavailability of tacrolimus in patients with renal transplantation. PLoS One. 2018;13(4):e0191921
  47. 47. Brown TS, Elster EA, Stevens K, Graybill JC, Gillern S, Phinney S, et al. Bayesian modeling of pretransplant variables accurately predicts kidney graft survival. American Journal of Nephrology. 2012;36(6):561-569
  48. 48. Badrouchi S, Bacha MM, Hedri H, Ben Abdallah T, Abderrahim E. Toward generalizing the use of artificial intelligence in nephrology and kidney transplantation. Journal of Nephrology. 2023;36(4):1087-1100
  49. 49. Beetz NL, Geisel D, Shnayien S, Auer TA, Globke B, Ollinger R, et al. Effects of artificial intelligence-derived body composition on kidney graft and patient survival in the Eurotransplant senior program. Biomedicine. 2022;10(3):554
  50. 50. Shadabi F, Cox RJ, Sharma D, Petrovsky N. A hybrid decision tree – artificial neural networks ensemble approach for kidney transplantation outcomes prediction. In: Khosla R, Howlett RJ, Jain LC, editors. Knowledge-Based Intelligent Information and Engineering Systems. KES 2005. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Vol. 3682. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; 2005, 2005. pp. 116-122
  51. 51. Burlacu A, Iftene A, Jugrin D, Popa IV, Lupu PM, Vlad C, et al. Using artificial intelligence resources in dialysis and kidney transplant patients: A literature review. BioMed Research International. 2020;2020:9867872
  52. 52. Kim JA, Massie A, Segev D, Bae S. Donor and recipient age matching for kidney transplantation: A machine learning approach. American Transplant Congress. 2022;2022
  53. 53. Guijo-Rubio D, Briceno J, Gutierrez PA, Ayllon MD, Ciria R, Hervas-Martinez C. Statistical methods versus machine learning techniques for donor-recipient matching in liver transplantation. PLoS One. 2021;16(5):e0252068
  54. 54. Simic-Ogrizovic S, Furuncic D, Lezaic V, Radivojevic D, Blagojevic R, Djukanovic L. Using ANN in selection of the most important variables in prediction of chronic renal allograft rejection progression. Transplantation Proceedings. 1999;31(1-2):368
  55. 55. Fritsche L, Schlaefer A, Budde K, Schroeter K, Neumayer HH. Recognition of critical situations from time series of laboratory results by case-based reasoning. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association. 2002;9(5):520-528
  56. 56. Santori G, Fontana I, Valente U. Application of an artificial neural network model to predict delayed decrease of serum creatinine in pediatric patients after kidney transplantation. Transplantation Proceedings. 2007;39(6):1813-1819
  57. 57. Greco R, Papalia T, Lofaro D, Maestripieri S, Mancuso D, Bonofiglio R. Decisional trees in renal transplant follow-up. Transplantation Proceedings. 2010;42(4):1134-1136
  58. 58. Yoo KD, Noh J, Lee H, Kim DK, Lim CS, Kim YH, et al. A machine learning approach using survival statistics to predict graft survival in kidney transplant recipients: A multicenter cohort study. Scientific Reports. 2017;7(1):8904
  59. 59. Rashidi Khazaee P, Bagherzadeh J, Niazkhani Z, Pirnejad H. A dynamic model for predicting graft function in kidney recipients' upcoming follow up visits: A clinical application of artificial neural network. International Journal of Medical Informatics. 2018;119:125-133
  60. 60. Seeling W, Plischke M, Schuh C. Knowledge-based tacrolimus therapy for kidney transplant patients. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics. 2012;180:310-314
  61. 61. Stachowska E, Gutowska I, Strzelczak A, Wesolowska T, Safranow K, Ciechanowski K, et al. The use of neural networks in evaluation of the direction and dynamics of changes in lipid parameters in kidney transplant patients on the Mediterranean diet. Journal of Renal Nutrition. 2006;16(2):150-159
  62. 62. Lozanovski VJ, Khajeh E, Fonouni H, Pfeiffenberger J, von Haken R, Brenner T, et al. The impact of major extended donor criteria on graft failure and patient mortality after liver transplantation. Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery. 2018;403(6):719-731
  63. 63. de Boer JD, Blok JJ, Braat AE. Graft quality and prediction of outcome after liver transplantation. Transplantation. 2017;101(8):e286
  64. 64. Wingfield LR, Ceresa C, Thorogood S, Fleuriot J, Knight S. Using artificial intelligence for predicting survival of individual grafts in liver transplantation: A systematic review. Liver Transplantation. 2020;26(7):922-934
  65. 65. Calleja Lozano R, Hervas Martinez C, Briceno Delgado FJ. Crossroads in liver transplantation: Is artificial intelligence the key to donor-recipient matching? Medicina (Kaunas). 2022;58(12):1743
  66. 66. Ferrarese A, Sartori G, Orru G, Frigo AC, Pelizzaro F, Burra P, et al. Machine learning in liver transplantation: A tool for some unsolved questions? Transplant International. 2021;34(3):398-411
  67. 67. Spann A, Yasodhara A, Kang J, Watt K, Wang B, Goldenberg A, et al. Applying machine learning in liver disease and transplantation: A comprehensive review. Hepatology. 2020;71(3):1093-1105
  68. 68. Briceno J, Cruz-Ramirez M, Prieto M, Navasa M, Ortiz de Urbina J, Orti R, et al. Use of artificial intelligence as an innovative donor-recipient matching model for liver transplantation: Results from a multicenter Spanish study. Journal of Hepatology. 2014;61(5):1020-1028
  69. 69. Kwong A, Hameed B, Syed S, Ho R, Mard H, Arshad S, et al. Machine learning to predict waitlist dropout among liver transplant candidates with hepatocellular carcinoma. Cancer Medicine. 2022;11(6):1535-1541
  70. 70. Nagai S, Nallabasannagari AR, Moonka D, Reddiboina M, Yeddula S, Kitajima T, et al. Use of neural network models to predict liver transplantation waitlist mortality. Liver Transplantation. 2022;28(7):1133-1143
  71. 71. Bertsimas D, Kung J, Trichakis N, Wang Y, Hirose R, Vagefi PA. Development and validation of an optimized prediction of mortality for candidates awaiting liver transplantation. American Journal of Transplantation. 2019;19(4):1109-1118
  72. 72. Kanwal F, Taylor TJ, Kramer JR, Cao Y, Smith D, Gifford AL, et al. Development, validation, and evaluation of a simple machine learning model to predict cirrhosis mortality. JAMA Network Open. 2020;3(11):e2023780
  73. 73. Guo A, Mazumder NR, Ladner DP, Foraker RE. Predicting mortality among patients with liver cirrhosis in electronic health records with machine learning. PLoS One. 2021;16(8):e0256428
  74. 74. Oztekin AA-EL, Sevkli Z, et al. A decision analytic approach to predicting quality of life for lung transplant recipients: A hybrid genetic algorithms-based methodology. European Journal of Operational Research. 2018;266:639-651
  75. 75. Palmieri V, Montisci A, Vietri MT, Colombo PC, Sala S, Maiello C, et al. Artificial intelligence, big data and heart transplantation: Actualities. International Journal of Medical Informatics. 2023;176:105110
  76. 76. Garcia-Canadilla P, Sanchez-Martinez S, Marti-Castellote PM, Slorach C, Hui W, Piella G, et al. Machine-learning-based exploration to identify remodeling patterns associated with death or heart-transplant in pediatric-dilated cardiomyopathy. The Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation. 2022;41(4):516-526
  77. 77. Kienzl K, Sarg B, Golderer G, Obrist P, Werner ER, Werner-Felmayer G, et al. Proteomic profiling of acute cardiac allograft rejection. Transplantation. 2009;88(4):553-560
  78. 78. Zhu Y, Wang MD, Tong L, Deshpande SR. Improved prediction on heart transplant rejection using convolutional autoencoder and multiple instance learning on whole-slide imaging. IEEE-EMBS International Conference on Biomedical and Health Informatics. 2019;2019
  79. 79. Castellani C, Burrello J, Fedrigo M, Burrello A, Bolis S, Di Silvestre D, et al. Circulating extracellular vesicles as non-invasive biomarker of rejection in heart transplant. The Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation. 2020;39(10):1136-1148
  80. 80. Peyster EG, Arabyarmohammadi S, Janowczyk A, Azarianpour-Esfahani S, Sekulic M, Cassol C, et al. An automated computational image analysis pipeline for histological grading of cardiac allograft rejection. European Heart Journal. 2021;42(24):2356-2369
  81. 81. Wei D, Trenson S, Van Keer JM, Melgarejo J, Cutsforth E, Thijs L, et al. The novel proteomic signature for cardiac allograft vasculopathy. ESC Heart Failure. 2022;9(2):1216-1227
  82. 82. Oztekin A, Delen D, Kong ZJ. Predicting the graft survival for heart-lung transplantation patients: An integrated data mining methodology. International Journal of Medical Informatics. 2009;78(12):e84-e96
  83. 83. Nilsson J, Ohlsson M, Hoglund P, Ekmehag B, Koul B, Andersson B. The international heart transplant survival algorithm (IHTSA): A new model to improve organ sharing and survival. PLoS One. 2015;10(3):e0118644
  84. 84. Medved D, Nugues P, Nilsson J. Simulating the outcome of heart allocation policies using deep neural networks. Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. 2018;2018:6141-6144
  85. 85. Yoon J, Zame WR, Banerjee A, Cadeiras M, Alaa AM, van der Schaar M. Personalized survival predictions via trees of predictors: An application to cardiac transplantation. PLoS One. 2018;13(3):e0194985
  86. 86. Kransdorf EP, Kittleson MM, Benck LR, Patel JK, Chung JS, Esmailian F, et al. Predicted heart mass is the optimal metric for size match in heart transplantation. The Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation. 2019;38(2):156-165
  87. 87. Agasthi P, Buras MR, Smith SD, Golafshar MA, Mookadam F, Anand S, et al. Machine learning helps predict long-term mortality and graft failure in patients undergoing heart transplant. General Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery. 2020;68(12):1369-1376
  88. 88. Hsich EM, Blackstone EH, Thuita LW, McNamara DM, Rogers JG, Yancy CW, et al. Heart transplantation: An In-depth survival analysis. JACC Heart Failure. 2020;8(7):557-568
  89. 89. Ayers B, Sandholm T, Gosev I, Prasad S, Kilic A. Using machine learning to improve survival prediction after heart transplantation. Journal of Cardiac Surgery. 2021;36(11):4113-4120
  90. 90. Zhou Y, Chen S, Rao Z, Yang D, Liu X, Dong N, et al. Prediction of 1-year mortality after heart transplantation using machine learning approaches: A single-center study from China. International Journal of Cardiology. 2021;339:21-27
  91. 91. Wadhwani SI, Hsu EK, Shaffer ML, Anand R, Ng VL, Bucuvalas JC. Predicting ideal outcome after pediatric liver transplantation: An exploratory study using machine learning analyses to leverage studies of pediatric liver transplantation data. Pediatric Transplantation. 2019;23(7):e13554
  92. 92. Miller R, Tumin D, Cooper J, Hayes D Jr, Tobias JD. Prediction of mortality following pediatric heart transplant using machine learning algorithms. Pediatric Transplantation. 2019;23(3):e13360
  93. 93. Alafif T, Tehame AM, Bajaba S, Barnawi A, Zia S. Machine and deep learning towards COVID-19 diagnosis and treatment: Survey, challenges, and future directions. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021;18(3):1117
  94. 94. Tran J, Sharma D, Gotlieb N, Xu W, Bhat M. Application of machine learning in liver transplantation: A review. Hepatology International. 2022;16(3):495-508

Written By

Badi Rawashdeh

Submitted: 22 January 2024 Reviewed: 23 February 2024 Published: 12 April 2024