术后新发心房颤动预测模型研究进展: 从静态评分到多模态智能矩阵
Research Progress on Prediction Models for Postoperative Atrial Fibrillation: From Static Scoring Systems to Multimodal Intelligent Matrices
摘要: 术后新发心房颤动(POAF)是围手术期极具危害的并发症,直接影响患者的远期预后。随着人工智能技术的迅猛发展,POAF的风险预警已实现从传统回归评分向集成机器学习(ML)与多模态深度学习(DL)架构的跨越。本文系统性地综述了2021年至2026年期间的关键技术演进,论证了基于电生理异质性(如心房传导阻滞与非同步性)的特征选择逻辑,深入剖析了Stacking集成架构与Transformer注意力机制在提升预测精度(AUC > 0.9)方面的数学优势。同时,文章探讨了SHAP归因分析在重构临床信任、指导闭环干预路径中的转化价值。最后,针对算法漂移及跨中心验证等临床转化瓶颈,提出了持续学习与穿戴式实时监测的未来愿景,旨在为构建高精度、可解释的围术期智慧决策平台提供理论支撑。
Abstract: Postoperative atrial fibrillation (POAF) is a critical perioperative complication that significantly impacts long-term patient prognosis. With the rapid evolution of artificial intelligence, POAF risk stratification is undergoing a fundamental paradigm shift from traditional regression-based scores to sophisticated ensemble machine learning (ML) and multimodal deep learning (DL) architectures. This review systematically evaluates key technological advancements from 2021 to 2026, elucidating the feature selection logic grounded in electrophysiological heterogeneity (e.g., conduction block and atrial asynchrony). We analyze the mathematical underpinnings of Stacking ensembles and Transformer-based Attention mechanisms in achieving superior predictive accuracy (AUC > 0.9). Furthermore, the clinical utility of SHAP-based explainability in reconstructing medical trust and guiding closed-loop intervention pathways is discussed. Finally, addressing the critical bottlenecks of clinical translation such as algorithm drift and multi-center validation, we propose future directions involving continual learning and wearable real-time monitoring to establish highly accurate, interpretable perioperative decision-support platforms.
文章引用:王晗哲, 王寅. 术后新发心房颤动预测模型研究进展: 从静态评分到多模态智能矩阵[J]. 临床医学进展, 2026, 16(4): 1021-1030. https://doi.org/10.12677/acm.2026.1641334

参考文献

[1] El-Sherbini, A.H., Shah, A., Cheng, R., Elsebaie, A., Harby, A.A., Redfearn, D., et al. (2023) Machine Learning for Predicting Postoperative Atrial Fibrillation after Cardiac Surgery: A Scoping Review of Current Literature. The American Journal of Cardiology, 209, 66-75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[2] Mariscalco, G., Biancari, F., Zanobini, M., Cottini, M., Piffaretti, G., Saccocci, M., et al. (2014) Bedside Tool for Predicting the Risk of Postoperative Atrial Fibrillation after Cardiac Surgery: The POAF Score. Journal of the American Heart Association, 3, e000752. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[3] Suero, O.R., Ali, A.K., Barron, L.R., Segar, M.W., Moon, M.R. and Chatterjee, S. (2024) Postoperative Atrial Fibrillation (POAF) after Cardiac Surgery: Clinical Practice Review. Journal of Thoracic Disease, 16, 1503-1520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[4] Amar, D., Zhang, H., Tan, K.S., Piening, D., Rusch, V.W. and Jones, D.R. (2019) A Brain Natriuretic Peptide-Based Prediction Model for Atrial Fibrillation after Thoracic Surgery: Development and Internal Validation. The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 157, 2493-2499.e1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[5] Oh, A.R., Park, J., Shin, S.J., Choi, B., Lee, J., Yang, K., et al. (2023) Prediction Model for Postoperative Atrial Fibrillation in Non-Cardiac Surgery Using Machine Learning. Frontiers in Medicine, 9, Article 983330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[6] Pandey, A., Okaj, I., Ichhpuniani, S., Tao, B., Kaur, H., Spence, J.D., et al. (2023) Risk Scores for Prediction of Postoperative Atrial Fibrillation after Cardiac Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. The American Journal of Cardiology, 209, 232-240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[7] Kharbanda, R.K., van Schie, M.S., Taverne, Y.J.H.J., de Groot, N.M.S. and Bogers, A.J.J.C. (2021) Novel Insights in Pathophysiology of Postoperative Atrial Fibrillation. JTCVS Open, 6, 120-129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[8] Kolek, M.J., Muehlschlegel, J.D., Bush, W.S., Parvez, B., Murray, K.T., Stein, C.M., et al. (2015) Genetic and Clinical Risk Prediction Model for Postoperative Atrial Fibrillation. Circulation: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology, 8, 25-31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[9] Li, J., Liu, S., Hu, Y., Zhu, L., Mao, Y. and Liu, J. (2022) Predicting Mortality in Intensive Care Unit Patients with Heart Failure Using an Interpretable Machine Learning Model: Retrospective Cohort Study. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 24, e38082. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[10] Lee, J.Y. (2023) Surrogacy: Beyond the Commercial/Altruistic Distinction. Journal of Medical Ethics, 49, 196-199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[11] Lee, J., Lee, H., Sherbini, A.E., Baghaie, L., Leroy, F., Abdel-Qadir, H., et al. (2024) Epigenetic MicroRNAs as Prognostic Markers of Postoperative Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review. Current Problems in Cardiology, 49, Article 102106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[12] Zhao, R., Wang, Z., Cao, F., Song, J., Fan, S., Qiu, J., et al. (2021) New-Onset Postoperative Atrial Fibrillation after Total Arch Repair Is Associated with Increased In-Hospital Mortality. Journal of the American Heart Association, 10, e021980. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[13] Collins, G.S., Reitsma, J.B., Altman, D.G. and Moons, K.G.M. (2015) Transparent Reporting of a Multivariable Prediction Model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis (TRIPOD): The TRIPOD Statement. British Medical Journal, 350, g7594. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[14] Han, H., Zhang, J., Wang, X., Ge, W. and Qu, J.Z. (2025) Development of an Interpretable Machine Learning Model to Predict Short-Term Bleeding Risk in Patients Receiving Dual Antithrombotic Therapy Following Cardiac Surgery. International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy, 48, 513-523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[15] Lu, Y., Chen, Q., Zhang, H., Huang, M., Yao, Y., Ming, Y., et al. (2023) Machine Learning Models of Postoperative Atrial Fibrillation Prediction after Cardiac Surgery. Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia, 37, 360-366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[16] Steyerberg, E.W. (2019) Clinical Prediction Models: A Practical Approach to Development, Validation, and Updating. Springer.
[17] Smith, L.A., Oakden-Rayner, L., Bird, A., Zeng, M., To, M., Mukherjee, S., et al. (2023) Machine Learning and Deep Learning Predictive Models for Long-Term Prognosis in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. The Lancet Digital Health, 5, e872-e881. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[18] Breiman, L. (2001) Random Forests. Machine Learning, 45, 5-32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[19] Shakhgeldyan, K.I., Rublev, V.Y., Kuksin, N.S., Geltser, B.I. and Pak, R.L. (2026) Multilevel Predictors Categorization for Post-CABG Atrial Fibrillation Prediction. Biology Methods and Protocols, 11, bpaf092. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[20] Ma, W.J., Chen, S.J., Zhao, Y., et al. (2025) Machine Learning Models and Restricted Cubic Spline Were Employed to Analyze and Predict Postoperative Ischemic Stroke in Type A Aortic Dissection Patients. BMC Cardiovascular Disorders, 26, Article 34.
[21] Gong, Z., Haierla, S., Shi, J. and Liu, X. (2025) Construction of a Risk Prediction Model for Postoperative Atrial Fibrillation in Lung Cancer Patients Based on Multi-Dimensional Feature Fusion and Ensemble Learning. Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine, 12, Article 1679973. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[22] Sau, A., Pastika, L., Sieliwonczyk, E., Patlatzoglou, K., Ribeiro, A.H., McGurk, K.A., et al. (2024) Artificial Intelligence-Enabled Electrocardiogram for Mortality and Cardiovascular Risk Estimation: A Model Development and Validation Study. The Lancet Digital Health, 6, e791-e802. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[23] Tohyama, T., Ide, T., Ikeda, M., Nagata, T., Tagawa, K., Hirose, M., et al. (2023) Deep Learning of ECG for the Prediction of Postoperative Atrial Fibrillation. Circulation: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology, 16, e011579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[24] Zillner, L., Andreas, M. and Mach, M. (2024) Wearable Heart Rate Variability and Atrial Fibrillation Monitoring to Improve Clinically Relevant Endpoints in Cardiac Surgery—A Systematic Review. mHealth, 10, Article 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[25] Kaur, H., Chen, H., Catrip, J., Weitzel, N. and Liu, H. (2026) Predicting Postoperative Atrial Fibrillation: An Explainable Deep Learning Approach. Journal of Biomedical Research, 40, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[26] Vaswani, A., Shazeer, N., Parmar, N., et al. (2017) Attention Is All You Need.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1706.03762
[27] Lundberg, S.M. and Lee, S.I. (2017) A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictions. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems.
[28] Nguyen, V., Garg, S. and Mittal, R. (2025) Machine Learning Prediction of Intensive Care Unit Outcomes in Atrial Fibrillation Patients: A Rapid Review. Cureus, 17, e99732. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[29] Zhang, Y., Shi, K. and Li, B. (2025) A Brief History of Digital Twin Technology.
[30] Nye, L. (2023) Digital Twins for Patient Care via Knowledge Graphs and Closed-Form Continuous-Time Liquid Neural Networks.
[31] Mesinovic, M., Buhlan, M. and Zhu, T. (2025) Causal Graph Neural Networks for Healthcare.
[32] Saxena, S. and Kovesdy, A. (2026) Real-World Applications of AI in LTE and 5G-NR Network Infrastructure.
[33] Lyu, Y.L., Li, Z., Tran, V., et al. (2026) Building Digital Twins of Different Human Organs for Personalized Healthcare.
[34] Liu, Y., Han, L., Li, J., Gong, M., Zhang, H. and Guan, X. (2017) Consumption Coagulopathy in Acute Aortic Dissection: Principles of Management. Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery, 12, Article No. 50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[35] Rudin, C. (2019) Stop Explaining Black Box Machine Learning Models for High Stakes Decisions and Use Interpretable Models Instead. Nature Machine Intelligence, 1, 206-215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[36] Yang, Z., Raymond, O.I., Zhang, C., Wan, Y. and Long, J. (2018) DFTerNet: Towards 2-Bit Dynamic Fusion Networks for Accurate Human Activity Recognition. IEEE Access, 6, 56750-56764. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef