Cargando…
Development and validation of a reinforcement learning algorithm to dynamically optimize mechanical ventilation in critical care
The aim of this work was to develop and evaluate the reinforcement learning algorithm VentAI, which is able to suggest a dynamically optimized mechanical ventilation regime for critically-ill patients. We built, validated and tested its performance on 11,943 events of volume-controlled mechanical ve...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7895944/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33608661 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41746-021-00388-6 |
_version_ | 1783653459352879104 |
---|---|
author | Peine, Arne Hallawa, Ahmed Bickenbach, Johannes Dartmann, Guido Fazlic, Lejla Begic Schmeink, Anke Ascheid, Gerd Thiemermann, Christoph Schuppert, Andreas Kindle, Ryan Celi, Leo Marx, Gernot Martin, Lukas |
author_facet | Peine, Arne Hallawa, Ahmed Bickenbach, Johannes Dartmann, Guido Fazlic, Lejla Begic Schmeink, Anke Ascheid, Gerd Thiemermann, Christoph Schuppert, Andreas Kindle, Ryan Celi, Leo Marx, Gernot Martin, Lukas |
author_sort | Peine, Arne |
collection | PubMed |
description | The aim of this work was to develop and evaluate the reinforcement learning algorithm VentAI, which is able to suggest a dynamically optimized mechanical ventilation regime for critically-ill patients. We built, validated and tested its performance on 11,943 events of volume-controlled mechanical ventilation derived from 61,532 distinct ICU admissions and tested it on an independent, secondary dataset (200,859 ICU stays; 25,086 mechanical ventilation events). A patient “data fingerprint” of 44 features was extracted as multidimensional time series in 4-hour time steps. We used a Markov decision process, including a reward system and a Q-learning approach, to find the optimized settings for positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP), fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO(2)) and ideal body weight-adjusted tidal volume (Vt). The observed outcome was in-hospital or 90-day mortality. VentAI reached a significantly increased estimated performance return of 83.3 (primary dataset) and 84.1 (secondary dataset) compared to physicians’ standard clinical care (51.1). The number of recommended action changes per mechanically ventilated patient constantly exceeded those of the clinicians. VentAI chose 202.9% more frequently ventilation regimes with lower Vt (5–7.5 mL/kg), but 50.8% less for regimes with higher Vt (7.5–10 mL/kg). VentAI recommended 29.3% more frequently PEEP levels of 5–7 cm H(2)O and 53.6% more frequently PEEP levels of 7–9 cmH(2)O. VentAI avoided high (>55%) FiO(2) values (59.8% decrease), while preferring the range of 50–55% (140.3% increase). In conclusion, VentAI provides reproducible high performance by dynamically choosing an optimized, individualized ventilation strategy and thus might be of benefit for critically ill patients. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7895944 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-78959442021-03-03 Development and validation of a reinforcement learning algorithm to dynamically optimize mechanical ventilation in critical care Peine, Arne Hallawa, Ahmed Bickenbach, Johannes Dartmann, Guido Fazlic, Lejla Begic Schmeink, Anke Ascheid, Gerd Thiemermann, Christoph Schuppert, Andreas Kindle, Ryan Celi, Leo Marx, Gernot Martin, Lukas NPJ Digit Med Article The aim of this work was to develop and evaluate the reinforcement learning algorithm VentAI, which is able to suggest a dynamically optimized mechanical ventilation regime for critically-ill patients. We built, validated and tested its performance on 11,943 events of volume-controlled mechanical ventilation derived from 61,532 distinct ICU admissions and tested it on an independent, secondary dataset (200,859 ICU stays; 25,086 mechanical ventilation events). A patient “data fingerprint” of 44 features was extracted as multidimensional time series in 4-hour time steps. We used a Markov decision process, including a reward system and a Q-learning approach, to find the optimized settings for positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP), fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO(2)) and ideal body weight-adjusted tidal volume (Vt). The observed outcome was in-hospital or 90-day mortality. VentAI reached a significantly increased estimated performance return of 83.3 (primary dataset) and 84.1 (secondary dataset) compared to physicians’ standard clinical care (51.1). The number of recommended action changes per mechanically ventilated patient constantly exceeded those of the clinicians. VentAI chose 202.9% more frequently ventilation regimes with lower Vt (5–7.5 mL/kg), but 50.8% less for regimes with higher Vt (7.5–10 mL/kg). VentAI recommended 29.3% more frequently PEEP levels of 5–7 cm H(2)O and 53.6% more frequently PEEP levels of 7–9 cmH(2)O. VentAI avoided high (>55%) FiO(2) values (59.8% decrease), while preferring the range of 50–55% (140.3% increase). In conclusion, VentAI provides reproducible high performance by dynamically choosing an optimized, individualized ventilation strategy and thus might be of benefit for critically ill patients. Nature Publishing Group UK 2021-02-19 /pmc/articles/PMC7895944/ /pubmed/33608661 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41746-021-00388-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Article Peine, Arne Hallawa, Ahmed Bickenbach, Johannes Dartmann, Guido Fazlic, Lejla Begic Schmeink, Anke Ascheid, Gerd Thiemermann, Christoph Schuppert, Andreas Kindle, Ryan Celi, Leo Marx, Gernot Martin, Lukas Development and validation of a reinforcement learning algorithm to dynamically optimize mechanical ventilation in critical care |
title | Development and validation of a reinforcement learning algorithm to dynamically optimize mechanical ventilation in critical care |
title_full | Development and validation of a reinforcement learning algorithm to dynamically optimize mechanical ventilation in critical care |
title_fullStr | Development and validation of a reinforcement learning algorithm to dynamically optimize mechanical ventilation in critical care |
title_full_unstemmed | Development and validation of a reinforcement learning algorithm to dynamically optimize mechanical ventilation in critical care |
title_short | Development and validation of a reinforcement learning algorithm to dynamically optimize mechanical ventilation in critical care |
title_sort | development and validation of a reinforcement learning algorithm to dynamically optimize mechanical ventilation in critical care |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7895944/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33608661 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41746-021-00388-6 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT peinearne developmentandvalidationofareinforcementlearningalgorithmtodynamicallyoptimizemechanicalventilationincriticalcare AT hallawaahmed developmentandvalidationofareinforcementlearningalgorithmtodynamicallyoptimizemechanicalventilationincriticalcare AT bickenbachjohannes developmentandvalidationofareinforcementlearningalgorithmtodynamicallyoptimizemechanicalventilationincriticalcare AT dartmannguido developmentandvalidationofareinforcementlearningalgorithmtodynamicallyoptimizemechanicalventilationincriticalcare AT fazliclejlabegic developmentandvalidationofareinforcementlearningalgorithmtodynamicallyoptimizemechanicalventilationincriticalcare AT schmeinkanke developmentandvalidationofareinforcementlearningalgorithmtodynamicallyoptimizemechanicalventilationincriticalcare AT ascheidgerd developmentandvalidationofareinforcementlearningalgorithmtodynamicallyoptimizemechanicalventilationincriticalcare AT thiemermannchristoph developmentandvalidationofareinforcementlearningalgorithmtodynamicallyoptimizemechanicalventilationincriticalcare AT schuppertandreas developmentandvalidationofareinforcementlearningalgorithmtodynamicallyoptimizemechanicalventilationincriticalcare AT kindleryan developmentandvalidationofareinforcementlearningalgorithmtodynamicallyoptimizemechanicalventilationincriticalcare AT celileo developmentandvalidationofareinforcementlearningalgorithmtodynamicallyoptimizemechanicalventilationincriticalcare AT marxgernot developmentandvalidationofareinforcementlearningalgorithmtodynamicallyoptimizemechanicalventilationincriticalcare AT martinlukas developmentandvalidationofareinforcementlearningalgorithmtodynamicallyoptimizemechanicalventilationincriticalcare |