Perschinka Fabian, Peer Andreas, Joannidis Michael
Gemeinsame Einrichtung für Internistische Notfall- und Intensivmedizin, Department Innere Medizin, Medizinische Universität Innsbruck, Anichstraße 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Österreich.
Med Klin Intensivmed Notfmed. 2024 Apr;119(3):199-207. doi: 10.1007/s00063-024-01111-5. Epub 2024 Feb 23.
Digitalization is increasingly finding its way into intensive care units and with it artificial intelligence (AI) for critically ill patients. One promising area for the use of AI is in the field of acute kidney injury (AKI). The use of AI is primarily focused on the prediction of AKI, but further approaches are also being used to classify existing AKI into different phenotypes. Different AI models are used for prediction. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve values (AUROC) achieved with these models vary and are influenced by several factors, such as the prediction time and the definition of AKI. Most models have an AUROC between 0.650 and 0.900, with lower values for predictions further into the future and when applying Acute Kidney Injury Network (AKIN) instead of KDIGO criteria. Classification into phenotypes already makes it possible to categorize patients into groups with different risks of mortality or requirement of renal replacement therapy (RRT), but the etiologies or therapeutic consequences derived from this are still lacking. However, all the models suffer from AI-specific shortcomings. The use of large databases does not make it possible to promptly include recent changes in therapy and the implementation of new biomarkers in a relevant proportion. For this reason, serum creatinine and urinary output, with their known limitations, dominate current AI models for prediction impairing the performance of the current models. On the other hand, the increasingly complex models no longer allow physicians to understand the basis on which the warning of a threatening AKI is calculated and subsequent initiation of therapy should take place. The successful use of AIs in routine clinical practice will be highly determined by the trust of the physicians in the systems and overcoming the aforementioned weaknesses. However, the clinician will remain irreplaceable as the decisive authority for critically ill patients by combining measurable and nonmeasurable parameters.
数字化正越来越多地进入重症监护病房,随之而来的是针对重症患者的人工智能(AI)。人工智能应用的一个有前景的领域是急性肾损伤(AKI)领域。人工智能的应用主要集中在AKI的预测上,但也有其他方法用于将现有的AKI分类为不同的表型。不同的人工智能模型用于预测。这些模型获得的受试者工作特征曲线下面积值(AUROC)各不相同,并受到几个因素的影响,如预测时间和AKI的定义。大多数模型的AUROC在0.650至0.900之间,预测时间越远以及应用急性肾损伤网络(AKIN)而非KDIGO标准时,值越低。分类为表型已经能够将患者分为具有不同死亡风险或肾脏替代治疗(RRT)需求的组,但仍然缺乏由此得出的病因或治疗后果。然而,所有模型都存在人工智能特有的缺点。使用大型数据库无法及时以相关比例纳入治疗的最新变化和新生物标志物的应用。因此,血清肌酐和尿量,尽管有其已知的局限性,在当前用于预测的人工智能模型中占主导地位,这损害了当前模型的性能。另一方面,日益复杂的模型不再使医生能够理解威胁性AKI预警的计算依据以及随后应启动治疗的依据。人工智能在常规临床实践中的成功应用将在很大程度上取决于医生对系统的信任以及克服上述弱点。然而,通过结合可测量和不可测量的参数,临床医生作为重症患者的决定性权威将仍然不可替代。