Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35070381›Full record

ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2021

Machine learning methods for perioperative anesthetic management in cardiac surgery patients: a scoping review.

Santino R Rellum, Jaap Schuurmans, Ward H van der Ven, Susanne Eberl, Antoine H G Driessen, Alexander P J Vlaar, Denise P Veelo

Open access · diamondAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Blood Pressure Goals in Critically Ill Patients.Methodist DeBakey cardiovascular journal · 2023
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Santino R RellumDepartment of Anesthesiology, Amsterdam UMC, Location AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Jaap SchuurmansDepartment of Anesthesiology, Amsterdam UMC, Location AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Ward H van der VenDepartment of Anesthesiology, Amsterdam UMC, Location AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Susanne EberlDepartment of Anesthesiology, Amsterdam UMC, Location AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Antoine H G DriessenDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Heart Center, Amsterdam UMC, Location AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Alexander P J VlaarDepartment of Intensive Care, Amsterdam UMC, Location AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Denise P VeeloDepartment of Anesthesiology, Amsterdam UMC, Location AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Amsterdam University Medical Centers · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMachine learning (ML) is developing fast with promising prospects within medicine and already has several applications in perioperative care. We conducted a scoping review to examine the extent and potential limitations of ML implementation in perioperative anesthetic care, specifically in cardiac surgery patients.

methodsWe mapped the current literature by searching three databases: MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), and Cochrane Library. Articles were eligible if they reported on perioperative ML use in the field of cardiac surgery with relevance to anesthetic practices. Data on the applicability of ML and comparability to conventional statistical methods were extracted.

resultsForty-six articles on ML relevant to the work of the anesthesiologist in cardiac surgery were identified. Three main categories emerged: (I) event and risk prediction, (II) hemodynamic monitoring, and (III) automation of echocardiography. Prediction models based on ML tend to behave similarly to conventional statistical methods. Using dynamic hemodynamic or ultrasound data in ML models, however, shifts the potential to promising results.

conclusionsML in cardiac surgery is increasingly used in perioperative anesthetic management. The majority is used for prediction purposes similar to conventional clinical scores. Remarkable ML model performances are achieved when using real-time dynamic parameters. However, beneficial clinical outcomes of ML integration have yet to be determined. Nonetheless, the first steps introducing ML in perioperative anesthetic care for cardiac surgery have been taken.

Indexed as

anesthesiologyartificial intelligenceCardiac surgerymachine learningperioperative care

Identifiers

PMID35070381
PMCPMC8743411
OpenAlexW3202195220

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.