We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Cardiac intensivists frequently assess patient readiness to wean off mechanical ventilation with an extubation readiness trial despite it being no more effective than clinician judgement alone. We evaluated the utility of high-frequency physiologic data and machine learning for improving the prediction of extubation failure in children with cardiovascular disease.
Methods:
This was a retrospective analysis of clinical registry data and streamed physiologic extubation readiness trial data from one paediatric cardiac ICU (12/2016-3/2018). We analysed patients’ final extubation readiness trial. Machine learning methods (classification and regression tree, Boosting, Random Forest) were performed using clinical/demographic data, physiologic data, and both datasets. Extubation failure was defined as reintubation within 48 hrs. Classifier performance was assessed on prediction accuracy and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve.
Results:
Of 178 episodes, 11.2% (N = 20) failed extubation. Using clinical/demographic data, our machine learning methods identified variables such as age, weight, height, and ventilation duration as being important in predicting extubation failure. Best classifier performance with this data was Boosting (prediction accuracy: 0.88; area under the receiver operating characteristic curve: 0.74). Using physiologic data, our machine learning methods found oxygen saturation extremes and descriptors of dynamic compliance, central venous pressure, and heart/respiratory rate to be of importance. The best classifier in this setting was Random Forest (prediction accuracy: 0.89; area under the receiver operating characteristic curve: 0.75). Combining both datasets produced classifiers highlighting the importance of physiologic variables in determining extubation failure, though predictive performance was not improved.
Conclusion:
Physiologic variables not routinely scrutinised during extubation readiness trials were identified as potential extubation failure predictors. Larger analyses are necessary to investigate whether these markers can improve clinical decision-making.