CHRU Tours, Service de Médecine Intensive Réanimation, 2 Bd Tonnellé, F-37044, Tours Cedex 9, France.
CHRU Tours, Service d'Information Médicale, d'Epidémiologie et d'Economie de la Santé, Tours, France.
BMC Pulm Med. 2020 Mar 6;20(1):62. doi: 10.1186/s12890-020-1089-y.
Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) requires urgent and specific antimicrobial therapy. However, the causal pathogen is typically unknown at the point when anti-infective therapeutics must be initiated. Physicians synthesize information from diverse data streams to make appropriate decisions. Artificial intelligence (AI) excels at finding complex relationships in large volumes of data. We aimed to evaluate the abilities of experienced physicians and AI to answer this question at patient admission: is it a viral or a bacterial pneumonia?
We included patients hospitalized for CAP and recorded all data available in the first 3-h period of care (clinical, biological and radiological information). For this proof-of-concept investigation, we decided to study only CAP caused by a singular and identified pathogen. We built a machine learning model prediction using all collected data. Finally, an independent validation set of samples was used to test the pathogen prediction performance of: (i) a panel of three experts and (ii) the AI algorithm. Both were blinded regarding the final microbial diagnosis. Positive likelihood ratio (LR) values > 10 and negative LR values < 0.1 were considered clinically relevant.
We included 153 patients with CAP (70.6% men; 62 [51-73] years old; mean SAPSII, 37 [27-47]), 37% had viral pneumonia, 24% had bacterial pneumonia, 20% had a co-infection and 19% had no identified respiratory pathogen. We performed the analysis on 93 patients as co-pathogen and no-pathogen cases were excluded. The discriminant abilities of the AI approach were low to moderate (LR+ = 2.12 for viral and 6.29 for bacterial pneumonia), and the discriminant abilities of the experts were very low to low (LR+ = 3.81 for viral and 1.89 for bacterial pneumonia).
Neither experts nor an AI algorithm can predict the microbial etiology of CAP within the first hours of hospitalization when there is an urgent need to define the anti-infective therapeutic strategy.
社区获得性肺炎(CAP)需要紧急且有针对性的抗菌治疗。然而,在开始使用抗感染治疗时,通常无法确定病原体。医生会综合各种信息来源做出适当的决策。人工智能(AI)在从大量数据中找到复杂关系方面表现出色。我们旨在评估经验丰富的医生和 AI 在回答患者入院时的以下问题的能力:这是病毒性肺炎还是细菌性肺炎?
我们纳入了因 CAP 住院的患者,并记录了护理开始后 3 小时内所有可获得的数据(临床、生物学和影像学信息)。出于这一概念验证研究的目的,我们决定仅研究由单一且已识别的病原体引起的 CAP。我们使用收集到的所有数据构建了机器学习模型预测。最后,使用独立的验证样本集来测试以下内容的病原体预测性能:(i)一组三位专家和(ii)AI 算法。两者均对最终的微生物诊断结果设盲。阳性似然比(LR)值>10 和阴性 LR 值<0.1 被认为具有临床意义。
我们纳入了 153 例 CAP 患者(70.6%为男性;62[51-73]岁;平均 SAPSII,37[27-47]),其中 37%为病毒性肺炎,24%为细菌性肺炎,20%为混合感染,19%无明确的呼吸道病原体。我们对 93 例患者进行了分析,排除了共病原体和无病原体病例。AI 方法的鉴别能力为低到中度(LR+为病毒性肺炎 2.12,细菌性肺炎 6.29),而专家的鉴别能力为低到极低(LR+为病毒性肺炎 3.81,细菌性肺炎 1.89)。
在需要紧急确定抗感染治疗策略的情况下,专家和 AI 算法都无法在入院后的最初几个小时内预测 CAP 的微生物病因。