Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38987802›Full record

Observational studyCritical care (London, England)2024

A proof of concept for microcirculation monitoring using machine learning based hyperspectral imaging in critically ill patients: a monocentric observational study.

Judith Kohnke, Kevin Pattberg, Felix Nensa, Henning Kuhlmann, Thorsten Brenner, Karsten Schmidt, René Hosch, Florian Espeter

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Critical care (London, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Judith Kohnke *Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Neuroradiology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Kevin Pattberg *Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Essen, University Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Felix NensaInstitute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Neuroradiology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Henning KuhlmannDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Essen, University Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Thorsten BrennerDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Essen, University Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Karsten SchmidtDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Essen, University Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
René Hosch *Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Neuroradiology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Florian Espeter *Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Essen, University Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany. florian.espeter@uk-essen.de.

Funding

Stiftung Universitätsmedizin Essen 20204699120
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundImpaired microcirculation is a cornerstone of sepsis development and leads to reduced tissue oxygenation, influenced by fluid and catecholamine administration during treatment. Hyperspectral imaging (HSI) is a non-invasive bedside technology for visualizing physicochemical tissue characteristics. Machine learning (ML) for skin HSI might offer an automated approach for bedside microcirculation assessment, providing an individualized tissue fingerprint of critically ill patients in intensive care. The study aimed to determine if machine learning could be utilized to automatically identify regions of interest (ROIs) in the hand, thereby distinguishing between healthy individuals and critically ill patients with sepsis using HSI.

methodsHSI raw data from 75 critically ill sepsis patients and from 30 healthy controls were recorded using TIVITA® Tissue System and analyzed using an automated ML approach. Additionally, patients were divided into two groups based on their SOFA scores for further subanalysis: less severely ill (SOFA ≤ 5) and severely ill (SOFA > 5). The analysis of the HSI raw data was fully-automated using MediaPipe for ROI detection (palm and fingertips) and feature extraction. HSI Features were statistically analyzed to highlight relevant wavelength combinations using Mann-Whitney-U test and Benjamini, Krieger, and Yekutieli (BKY) correction. In addition, Random Forest models were trained using bootstrapping, and feature importances were determined to gain insights regarding the wavelength importance for a model decision.

resultsAn automated pipeline for generating ROIs and HSI feature extraction was successfully established. HSI raw data analysis accurately distinguished healthy controls from sepsis patients. Wavelengths at the fingertips differed in the ranges of 575-695 nm and 840-1000 nm. For the palm, significant differences were observed in the range of 925-1000 nm. Feature importance plots indicated relevant information in the same wavelength ranges. Combining palm and fingertip analysis provided the highest reliability, with an AUC of 0.92 to distinguish between sepsis patients and healthy controls.

conclusionBased on this proof of concept, the integration of automated and standardized ROIs along with automated skin HSI analyzes, was able to differentiate between healthy individuals and patients with sepsis. This approach offers a reliable and objective assessment of skin microcirculation, facilitating the rapid identification of critically ill patients.

Indexed as

Critical IllnessHyperspectral ImagingMachine LearningMicrocirculationAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMonitoring, PhysiologicProof of Concept StudySepsis

Identifiers

PMID38987802
PMCPMC11238485

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.