Predictors for extubation failure in COVID-19 patients using a machine learning approach

29Citations
Citations of this article
82Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Introduction: Determining the optimal timing for extubation can be challenging in the intensive care. In this study, we aim to identify predictors for extubation failure in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Methods: We used highly granular data from 3464 adult critically ill COVID patients in the multicenter Dutch Data Warehouse, including demographics, clinical observations, medications, fluid balance, laboratory values, vital signs, and data from life support devices. All intubated patients with at least one extubation attempt were eligible for analysis. Transferred patients, patients admitted for less than 24 h, and patients still admitted at the time of data extraction were excluded. Potential predictors were selected by a team of intensive care physicians. The primary and secondary outcomes were extubation without reintubation or death within the next 7 days and within 48 h, respectively. We trained and validated multiple machine learning algorithms using fivefold nested cross-validation. Predictor importance was estimated using Shapley additive explanations, while cutoff values for the relative probability of failed extubation were estimated through partial dependence plots. Results: A total of 883 patients were included in the model derivation. The reintubation rate was 13.4% within 48 h and 18.9% at day 7, with a mortality rate of 0.6% and 1.0% respectively. The grandient-boost model performed best (area under the curve of 0.70) and was used to calculate predictor importance. Ventilatory characteristics and settings were the most important predictors. More specifically, a controlled mode duration longer than 4 days, a last fraction of inspired oxygen higher than 35%, a mean tidal volume per kg ideal body weight above 8 ml/kg in the day before extubation, and a shorter duration in assisted mode (< 2 days) compared to their median values. Additionally, a higher C-reactive protein and leukocyte count, a lower thrombocyte count, a lower Glasgow coma scale and a lower body mass index compared to their medians were associated with extubation failure. Conclusion: The most important predictors for extubation failure in critically ill COVID-19 patients include ventilatory settings, inflammatory parameters, neurological status, and body mass index. These predictors should therefore be routinely captured in electronic health records.

References Powered by Scopus

Regression Shrinkage and Selection Via the Lasso

35799Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Greedy function approximation: A gradient boosting machine

19972Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

ASSESSMENT OF COMA AND IMPAIRED CONSCIOUSNESS. A Practical Scale

10435Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Machine learning for predicting successful extubation in patients receiving mechanical ventilation

11Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

The combination of radiomics features and VASARI standard to predict glioma grade

10Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Explainable machine learning approach to predict extubation in critically ill ventilated patients: a retrospective study in central Taiwan

8Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Fleuren, L. M., Dam, T. A., Tonutti, M., de Bruin, D. P., Lalisang, R. C. A., Gommers, D., … van Raalte, R. (2021). Predictors for extubation failure in COVID-19 patients using a machine learning approach. Critical Care, 25(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-021-03864-3

Readers over time

‘21‘22‘23‘24‘25015304560

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 19

61%

Researcher 6

19%

Professor / Associate Prof. 4

13%

Lecturer / Post doc 2

6%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 18

56%

Nursing and Health Professions 5

16%

Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Bi... 5

16%

Computer Science 4

13%

Article Metrics

Tooltip
Mentions
News Mentions: 1
Social Media
Shares, Likes & Comments: 33

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0