Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40119215›Full record

ReviewIntensive care medicine experimental2025

Let's get in sync: current standing and future of AI-based detection of patient-ventilator asynchrony.

Thijs P Rietveld, Björn J P van der Ster, Abraham Schoe, Henrik Endeman, Anton Balakirev, Daria Kozlova, Diederik A M P J Gommers, Annemijn H Jonkman

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Intensive care medicine experimental, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. PVADet: fast patient-ventilator asynchrony detection on waveforms.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. 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

8 authors.

Thijs P RietveldAdult Intensive Care, Erasmus Medical Center, Dr. Molewaterplein 40, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Björn J P van der SterAdult Intensive Care, Erasmus Medical Center, Dr. Molewaterplein 40, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Abraham SchoeIntensive Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Henrik EndemanAdult Intensive Care, Erasmus Medical Center, Dr. Molewaterplein 40, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Anton BalakirevDeep Breath B.V, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Daria KozlovaDeep Breath B.V, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Diederik A M P J GommersAdult Intensive Care, Erasmus Medical Center, Dr. Molewaterplein 40, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Annemijn H JonkmanAdult Intensive Care, Erasmus Medical Center, Dr. Molewaterplein 40, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. a.jonkman@erasmusmc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8778-5135

Funding

Health~Holland EMCLSH24018
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatient-ventilator asynchrony (PVA) is a mismatch between the patient's respiratory drive/effort and the ventilator breath delivery. It occurs frequently in mechanically ventilated patients and has been associated with adverse events and increased duration of ventilation. Identifying PVA through visual inspection of ventilator waveforms is highly challenging and time-consuming. Automated PVA detection using Artificial Intelligence (AI) has been increasingly studied, potentially offering real-time monitoring at the bedside. In this review, we discuss advances in automatic detection of PVA, focusing on developments of the last 15 years.

resultsNineteen studies were identified. Multiple forms of AI have been used for the automated detection of PVA, including rule-based algorithms, machine learning and deep learning. Three licensed algorithms are currently reported. Results of algorithms are generally promising (average reported sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of 0.80, 0.93 and 0.92, respectively), but most algorithms are only available offline, can detect a small subset of PVAs (focusing mostly on ineffective effort and double trigger asynchronies), or remain in the development or validation stage (84% (16/19 of the reviewed studies)). Moreover, only in 58% (11/19) of the studies a reference method for monitoring patient's breathing effort was available. To move from bench to bedside implementation, data quality should be improved and algorithms that can detect multiple PVAs should be externally validated, incorporating measures for breathing effort as ground truth. Last, prospective integration and model testing/finetuning in different ICU settings is key.

conclusionsAI-based techniques for automated PVA detection are increasingly studied and show potential. For widespread implementation to succeed, several steps, including external validation and (near) real-time employment, should be considered. Then, automated PVA detection could aid in monitoring and mitigating PVAs, to eventually optimize personalized mechanical ventilation, improve clinical outcomes and reduce clinician's workload.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligenceBedside implementationDeep learningICUMachine learningMechanical ventilationPatient-ventilator asynchronyRule-based algorithms

Identifiers

PMID40119215
PMCPMC11928342

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.