ArticleJTCVS open2023
Advanced artificial intelligence-guided hemodynamic management within cardiac enhanced recovery after surgery pathways: A multi-institution review.
Article in JTCVS open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- New Insights into Cardiac Intensive Care.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- Review
- Artificial Intelligence in Adult Cardiovascular Medicine and Surgery: Real-World Deployments and Outcomes.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Review
- Role of artificial intelligence in congenital heart disease.World journal of clinical pediatrics · 2025Review
- Comparison of Hemodynamic Management by Hypotension Prediction Index or Goal-Directed Therapy in Radical Cystectomies: A Prospective Observational Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- AcumenTM hypotension prediction index guidance for prevention and treatment of hypotension in noncardiac surgery: a prospective, single-arm, multicenter trial.Perioperative medicine (London, England) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The study objective was to report early outcomes of integrating Hypotension Prediction Index-guided hemodynamic management within a cardiac enhanced recovery pathway on total initial ventilation hours and length of stay in the intensive care unit. Methods: A multicenter, historical control, observational analysis of implementation of a hemodynamic management tool within enhanced recovery pathways was conducted by identifying cardiac surgery cases from 3 sites during 2 time periods, August 1 to December 31, 2019 (preprogram), and April 1 to August 31, 2021 (program). Reoperations, emergency (salvage), or cases requiring mechanical assist were excluded. Data were extracted from electronic medical records and chart reviews. Two primary outcome variables were length of stay in the intensive care unit (using Society of Thoracic Surgeons definitions) and acute kidney injury (using modified Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes criteria). One secondary outcome variable, total initial ventilation hours, used Society of Thoracic Surgeons definitions. Differences in length of stay in the intensive care unit and total ventilation time were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis and stepwise multiple linear regression. Acute kidney injury stage used chi-square and stepwise cumulative logistic regression. Results: A total of 1404 cases (795 preprogram; 609 program) were identified. Overall reductions of 6.8 and 4.4 hours in intensive care unit length of stay ( Conclusions: Adding artificial intelligence-guided hemodynamic management to cardiac enhanced recovery pathways resulted in associated reduced time in the intensive care unit for patients undergoing nonemergency cardiac surgery across institutions in a real-world setting.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.