Back to Search Start Over

Machine learning based method for the evaluation of the Analgesia Nociception Index in the assessment of general anesthesia

Authors :
María Martín
Jose M. Gonzalez-Cava
Jose A. Reboso
Ana León
José Luis Calvo-Rolle
Rafael Arnay
Juan Albino Méndez-Pérez
Source :
Computers in Biology and Medicine. 118:103645
Publication Year :
2020
Publisher :
Elsevier BV, 2020.

Abstract

Measuring the level of analgesia to adapt the opioids infusion during anesthesia to the real needs of the patient is still a challenge. This is a consequence of the absence of a specific measure capable of quantifying the nociception level of the patients. Unlike existing proposals, this paper aims to evaluate the suitability of the Analgesia Nociception Index (ANI) as a guidance variable to replicate the decisions made by the experts when a modification of the opioid infusion rate is required. To this end, different machine learning classifiers were trained with several sets of clinical features. Data for training were captured from 17 patients undergoing cholecystectomy surgery. Satisfactory results were obtained when including information about minimum values of ANI for predicting a change of dose. Specifically, a higher efficiency of the Support Vector Machine (SVM) classifier was observed compared with the situation in which the ANI index was not included: accuracy: 86.21% (83.62%–87.93%), precision: 86.11% (83.78%–88.57%), recall: 91.18% (88.24%–91.18%), specificity: 79.17% (75%–83.33%), AUC: 0.89 (0.87–0.90) and kappa index: 0.71 (0.66–0.75). The results of this research evidenced that including information about the minimum values of ANI together with the hemodynamic information outperformed the decisions made regarding only non-specific traditional signs such as heart rate and blood pressure. In addition, the analysis of the results showed that including the ANI monitor in the decision making process may anticipate a dose change to prevent hemodynamic events. Finally, the SVM was able to perform accurate predictions when making different decisions commonly observed in the clinical practice.

Details

ISSN :
00104825
Volume :
118
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
Computers in Biology and Medicine
Accession number :
edsair.doi.dedup.....9ae31ff4fd23b1bab0cd117f903be0ff
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compbiomed.2020.103645