Skip to main content

Predicting Death and Morbidity in Perforated Peptic Ulcer

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Information Technology and Systems (ICITS 2019)

Abstract

Peptic ulcers are defined as defects in the gastrointestinal mucosa that extend through the muscularis mucosae. Although not being the most common complication, perforations stand out as being the complication with the highest mortality rate. To predict the probability of mortality, several scoring systems based on clinical and biochemical parameters, such as the Boey and PULP scoring system have been developed. This article explores, using data mining in the medical data available, how the scoring systems perform when trying to predict mortality and patients’ state complication. We also try to conclude, from the two scoring systems presented, which predicts better the situations described. Regarding the results, we concluded that the PULP scoring allows a better mortality prediction achieving, in this case, above 90% accuracy, however, the results may be inconclusive due to the lack of patients who died in the dataset used. Regarding the complications, we concluded that, on the other hand, the Boey system achieves better results leading to a better prediction when it comes to predicting patients’ state complication.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Sandler, R.S., Everhart, J.E., Donowitz, M., et al.: The burden of selected digestive diseases in the United States. Gastroenterology 122(5), 1500–1511 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Wang, Y.R., Richter, J.E., Dempsey, D.T.: Trends and outcomes of hospitalizations for peptic ulcer disease in the United States, 1993 to 2006. Ann. Surg. 251(1), 51 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Irabor, D.O.: An audit of peptic ulcer surgery in Ibadan, Nigeria. West Afr. J. Med. 24(3), 242 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Sánchez-Delgado, J., Gené, E., Suárez, D., García-Iglesias, P., et al.: Has H. pylori prevalence in bleeding peptic ulcer been underestimated? A meta-regression. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 106(3), 398 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Lohsiriwat, V., Prapasrivorakul, S., Lohsiriwat, D.: Perforated peptic ulcer: clinical presentation, surgical outcomes, and the accuracy of the Boey scoring system in predicting postoperative morbidity and mortality. World J. Surg. 33, 80–85 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Møller, M.H., Engebjerg, M.C., Adamsen, S., Bendix, J., Thomsen, R.W.: The Peptic Ulcer Perforation (PULP) score: a predictor of mortality following peptic ulcer perforation. A cohort study. Acta Anaesthesiol. Scand. 56(5), 655–662 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Neto, C., Peixoto, H., Abelha, V., Abelha, A., Machado, J.: Knowledge discovery from surgical waiting lists. Procedia Comput. Sci. 121, 1104–1111 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Zhao, Y.: R and Data Mining: Examples and Case Studies. Academic Press, San Diego (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Pereira, J., Peixoto, H., Machado, J., Abelha, A.: A data mining approach for cardiovascular diagnosis. Open Comput. Sci. 7(1), 36–40 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Cohen, W.W.: Fast effective rule induction. In: Machine Learning Proceedings 1995, pp. 115–123 (1995)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Kohavi, R.: The power of decision tables. In: European Conference on Machine Learning, pp. 174–189. Springer, Heidelberg, April 1995

    Google Scholar 

  12. Najm, W.I.: Peptic ulcer disease. Prim. Care Clin. Off. Pract. 38(3), 383–394 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Parsania, V., Bhalodiya, N., Jani, N.N.: Applying Naïve Bayes, BayesNet, PART, JRip and OneR Algorithms on Hypothyroid Database for Comparative Analysis (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Wu, X., Kumar, V., Quinlan, J.R., Ghosh, J., Yang, Q., Motoda, H., McLachlan, G.J., Ng, A., Liu, B., Yu, P.S., Zhou, Z.H., Steinbach, M., Hand, D.J., Steinberg, D.: Top 10 algorithms in data mining. Knowl. Inf. Syst. 14(1), 1–37 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Quinlan, J.R.: C4.5: Programs for Machine Learning. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Arthur, D., Vassilvitskii, S.: k-means ++: the advantages of careful seeding. In: Proceedings of the Eighteenth Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, pp. 1027–1035. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, January 2007

    Google Scholar 

  17. Chapman, P., Clinton, J., Kerber, R., Khabaza, T., Reinartz, T., Shearer, C., Wirth, R.: CRISP-DM 1.0 Step-by-step data mining guide (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Reis, R., Peixoto, H., Machado, J., Abelha, A.: Machine learning in nutritional follow-up research. Open Comput. Sci. 7(1), 41–45 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Morais, A., Peixoto, H., Coimbra, C., Abelha, A., Machado, J.: Predicting the need of Neonatal Resuscitation using Data Mining. Procedia Comput. Sci. 113, 571–576 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Hand, D.J.: Principles of data mining. Drug Saf. 30(7), 621–622 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Cios, K.J., Moore, G.W.: Uniqueness of medical data mining. Artif. Intell. Med. 26(1–2), 1–24 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Yoo, I., Alafaireet, P., Marinov, M., Pena-Hernandez, K., Gopidi, R., Chang, J.F., Hua, L.: Data mining in healthcare and biomedicine: a survey of the literature. J. Med. Syst. 36(4), 2431–2448 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Thorsen, K., Søreide, J.A., Søreide, K.: Scoring systems for outcome prediction in patients with perforated peptic ulcer. Scand. J. Trauma Resusc. Emerg. Med. 21(1), 25 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work has been supported by Compete: POCI-01-0145-FEDER-007043 and FCT within the Project Scope UID/CEC/00319/2013.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to José Machado .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Peixoto, H. et al. (2019). Predicting Death and Morbidity in Perforated Peptic Ulcer. In: Rocha, Á., Ferrás, C., Paredes, M. (eds) Information Technology and Systems. ICITS 2019. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol 918. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11890-7_54

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics