Original Papers - Stones and Infections

Interpretable machine learning prediction of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy outcomes for urinary stones: a retrospective cohort study

Publisher's note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Published: 24 December 2025
393
Views
282
Downloads

Authors

Background: Accurately predicting the outcome of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) is a persistent clinical challenge. While machine learning (ML) offers potential for improved predictions, the opacity of many models hinders clinical trust and adoption. This study aimed to develop and validate an interpretable ML model to predict ESWL success using routinely available clinical data.
Patients and methods: In this retrospective cohort study, we analyzed data from 1,501 patients treated with a single ESWL session at a single institution (2022-2024). Six ML algorithms were trained on 75% of the data (n=1,125), with performance evaluated on a hold-out test set (n=376). Techniques to manage significant class imbalance were employed. Model interpretability was achieved using SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP).
Results: The extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) model demonstrated the best discriminative performance, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC-AUC) of 0.723 (95% CI: 0.662-0.784). However, a critical trade-off was observed: the model exhibited high specificity (95.2%) but low sensitivity (35.4%), meaning it identified most successes but missed nearly two-thirds of treatment failures. Stone density and size were the most influential predictors, and SHAP analysis provided clinically plausible, individualized explanations for predictions.
Conclusions: We present a transparent, interpretable ML framework for ESWL outcome prediction. While the model aligns with clinical reasoning and offers a foundation for trustworthy artificial intelligence, its current low sensitivity limits immediate standalone clinical utility for ruling out ESWL failure. The framework highlights the imperative for future work to improve sensitivity through richer datasets and prospective validation before integration into clinical pathways.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Citations

1. Geraghty RM, Davis NF, Tzelves L, et al. Best practice in interventional management of urolithiasis: an update from the European Association of Urology Guidelines Panel for Urolithiasis 2022. Eur Urol Focus. 2023; 9:199-208.
2. Salah M, Al-Ghashmi M, Tallai B, et al. Performance of 'triple-D' and 'quadruple-D' scores compared to a regression-based predictive model for treatment outcomes in extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. Arch Ital Urol Androl. 2025; 97:14265.
3. Salah M, Al-Ghashmi M, Tallai B, et al. Predictors of treatment failure and outcome assessment of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy with the Dornier Compact Delta® III Pro: experience from the first 1000 treatments. Arch Ital Urol Androl. 2025; 97:13867.
4. Garg M, Johnson H, Lee SM, et al. Role of Hounsfield unit in predicting outcomes of shock wave lithotripsy for renal calculi: outcomes of a systematic review. Curr Urol Rep. 2023; 24:173-85.
5. Ahmed F, Al-Kohlany K, Al-Naggar K, et al. Assessing the predictive accuracy of the S.T.O.N.E. score for stone-free rates in semirigid pneumatic ureteral lithotripsy: implications for validation. Res Rep Urol. 2025; 17:139-52.
6. Moghisi R, El Morr C, Pace KT, et al. A machine learning approach to predict the outcome of urinary calculi treatment using shock wave lithotripsy: model development and validation study. Interact J Med Res. 2022; 11:e33357.
7. Guo J, Zhang J, Zhang J, et al. Construction and validation of a urinary stone composition prediction model based on machine learning. Urolithiasis. 2025; 53:154.
8. Yang R, Zhao D, Ye C, et al. Predicting ESWL success for ureteral stones: a radiomics-based machine learning approach. BMC Med Imaging. 2025; 25:268.
9. Cui HW, Tan TK, Christiansen FE, et al. The utility of automated volume analysis of renal stones before and after shockwave lithotripsy treatment. Urolithiasis. 2021;49:219-26.
10. Ficky, Rasyid N, Atmoko W, Birowo P. Artificial intelligence in the prediction of stone-free status in urinary stone disease treated with extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy: a systematic review. F1000Res. 2025; 14:16.
11. Ennab M, McHeick H. Enhancing interpretability and accuracy of AI models in healthcare: a comprehensive review on challenges and future directions. Front Robot AI. 2024; 11:1444763.
12. Yang H, Wu X, Liu W, et al. CT-based AI model for predicting therapeutic outcomes in ureteral stones after single extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy through a cohort study. Int J Surg. 2024;110:6601-9.
13. Chen C-W, Liu W-Y, Huang L-Y, Chu Y-W. Using ensemble learning and hierarchical strategy to predict the outcomes of ESWL for upper ureteral stone treatment. Comput Biol Med 2024; 179:108904.
14. Gelmis M, Kardas S, Ayten A, et al. Predicting extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy outcomes using machine learning and the triple-/quadruple-D scores. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak. 2025;35:1007-13.
15. Mathew G, Agha R, Albrecht J, et al. STROCSS 2021: Strengthening the reporting of cohort, cross-sectional and case-control studies in surgery. Int J Surg. 2021; 96:106165.
16. Cui HW, Silva MD, Mills AW, et al. Predicting shockwave lithotripsy outcome for urolithiasis using clinical and stone computed tomography texture analysis variables. Sci Rep. 2019; 9:14674.
17. Abraham A, Kavoussi NL, Sui W, et al. Machine learning prediction of kidney stone composition using electronic health record-derived features. J Endourol. 2022;36:243-50.
18. Fan D, Liu H, Han Y, et al. Machine learning algorithms for predicting stone residue and recurrence after lateral decubitus percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Medicine (Baltimore) 2025; 104:e44750.
19. Fujita D, Harumoto S, Deguchi R, et al. Prediction of ureter ESWL outcome by machine learning and model interpretation approach using SHAP. Int J Biomedical Soft Comput Hum Sci 2022;26:97-102.
20. Choo MS, Uhmn S, Kim JK, et al. A prediction model using machine learning algorithm for assessing stone-free status after single session shock wave lithotripsy to treat ureteral stones. J Urol. 2018; 200:1371-7.
21. Ibarra V, Titler MG, Reiter RC. Issues in the development and implementation of clinical pathways. AACN Clin Issues 1996;7:436-47.

How to Cite



Interpretable machine learning prediction of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy outcomes for urinary stones: a retrospective cohort study. (2025). Archivio Italiano Di Urologia E Andrologia, 97(4). https://doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2025.14333