Who Benefits From Sinus Surgery? Comparing Generative AI and Supervised Machine Learning for Predicting Surgical Outcomes in Chronic Rhinosinusitis

Artificial intelligence has reshaped medical imaging, yet the use of AI on clinical data for prospective decision support remains limited. We study pre-operative prediction of clinically meaningful improvement in chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS), defining success as a more than 8.9-point reduction in SNOT-22 at 6 months (MCID). In a prospectively collected cohort where all patients underwent surgery, we ask whether models using only pre-operative clinical data could have identified those who would have poor outcomes, i.e. those who should have avoided surgery. We benchmark supervised ML (logistic regression, tree ensembles, and an in-house MLP) against generative AI (ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity), giving each the same structured inputs and constraining outputs to binary recommendations with confidence. Our best ML model (MLP) achieves 85 % accuracy with superior calibration and decision-curve net benefit. GenAI models underperform on discrimination and calibration across zero-shot setting. Notably, GenAI justifications align with clinician heuristics and the MLP's feature importance, repeatedly highlighting baseline SNOT-22, CT/endoscopy severity, polyp phenotype, and physchology/pain comorbidities. We provide a reproducible tabular-to-GenAI evaluation protocol and subgroup analyses. Findings support an ML-first, GenAI- augmented workflow: deploy calibrated ML for primary triage of surgical candidacy, with GenAI as an explainer to enhance transparency and shared decision-making.

Who Should Have Surgery? A Comparative Study of GenAI vs Supervised ML for CRS Surgical Outcome Prediction

Artificial intelligence has reshaped medical imaging, yet the use of AI on clinical data for prospective decision support remains limited. We study pre-operative prediction of clinically meaningful improvement in chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS), defining success as a more than 8.9-point reduction in SNOT-22 at 6 months (MCID). In a prospectively collected cohort where all patients underwent surgery, we ask whether models using only pre-operative clinical data could have identified those who would have poor outcomes, i.e. those who should have avoided surgery. We benchmark supervised ML (logistic regression, tree ensembles, and an in-house MLP) against generative AI (ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity), giving each the same structured inputs and constraining outputs to binary recommendations with confidence. Our best ML model (MLP) achieves 85 % accuracy with superior calibration and decision-curve net benefit. GenAI models underperform on discrimination and calibration across zero-shot setting. Notably, GenAI justifications align with clinician heuristics and the MLP's feature importance, repeatedly highlighting baseline SNOT-22, CT/endoscopy severity, polyp phenotype, and physchology/pain comorbidities. We provide a reproducible tabular-to-GenAI evaluation protocol and subgroup analyses. Findings support an ML-first, GenAI- augmented workflow: deploy calibrated ML for primary triage of surgical candidacy, with GenAI as an explainer to enhance transparency and shared decision-making.