Artificial intelligence in anaesthesiology: why don’t we have it in our hands after a decade of innovation? A systematic review and perspective

BACKGROUND: Machine learning (ML) tools are increasingly integrated into various sectors, including healthcare, where they have demonstrated disruptive potential. While anaesthesia is a specialty historically shaped by technological innovation, the precise clinical impact of ML remains poorly defined. Furthermore, despite a decade of prolific model development, the systematic translation of these computational tools into routine, everyday clinical workflows has stagnated. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted using the PubMed/Medline and EBSCO databases, supplemented by an analysis of Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved medical ML applications. To ensure methodological rigour, the selection process followed the PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Eligible peer-reviewed publications were restricted to those focusing primarily on the development, validation, or implementation of machine learning applications within the field of anaesthesia. RESULTS: Out of 6,425 screened publications, 1,021 were included in a datasheet. These included 302 reviews or opinion pieces, 5 case reports, and 714 articles focused on tool development or clinical evaluation. Although research topics were highly diverse, the vast majority of studies focused on the prediction of perioperative complications and patient prognosis. CONCLUSIONS: Machine learning represents a highly active and debated domain in anaesthesia, characterised by a substantial volume of published research. However, exceptionally few algorithmic models have successfully translated into practice-changing clinical tools. This persistent gap indicates that technical innovation alone is insufficient, as translation is severely hindered by inherent model limitations, software interoperability constraints, and socio-technical challenges within the clinical environment. Addressing the scarcity of hybrid clinician-developer profiles and establishing robust, external field validation are critical pre-requisites for meaningful clinical integration.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BMC Anesthesiology
Published
2026-06-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12871-026-03995-6
Primary Topic
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Artificial intelligence in anaesthesiology: why don’t we have it in our hands after a decade of innovation? A systematic review and perspective

Philippe Dony, Rémi Florquin
BMC Anesthesiology
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
article

Artificial intelligence in anaesthesiology: why don’t we have it in our hands after a decade of innovation? A systematic review and perspective

Philippe Dony, Rémi Florquin
article en

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Machine learning (ML) tools are increasingly integrated into various sectors, including healthcare, where they have demonstrated disruptive potential. While anaesthesia is a specialty historically shaped by technological innovation, the precise clinical impact of ML remains poorly defined. Furthermore, despite a decade of prolific model development, the systematic translation of these computational tools into routine, everyday clinical workflows has stagnated. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted using the PubMed/Medline and EBSCO databases, supplemented by an analysis of Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved medical ML applications. To ensure methodological rigour, the selection process followed the PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Eligible peer-reviewed publications were restricted to those focusing primarily on the development, validation, or implementation of machine learning applications within the field of anaesthesia. RESULTS: Out of 6,425 screened publications, 1,021 were included in a datasheet. These included 302 reviews or opinion pieces, 5 case reports, and 714 articles focused on tool development or clinical evaluation. Although research topics were highly diverse, the vast majority of studies focused on the prediction of perioperative complications and patient prognosis. CONCLUSIONS: Machine learning represents a highly active and debated domain in anaesthesia, characterised by a substantial volume of published research. However, exceptionally few algorithmic models have successfully translated into practice-changing clinical tools. This persistent gap indicates that technical innovation alone is insufficient, as translation is severely hindered by inherent model limitations, software interoperability constraints, and socio-technical challenges within the clinical environment. Addressing the scarcity of hybrid clinician-developer profiles and establishing robust, external field validation are critical pre-requisites for meaningful clinical integration.

BMC Anesthesiology
University of Mons (BE), Statistics Belgium (BE), Grand Charleroi Hospital (BE)
Industry, innovation and infrastructure
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.