This narrative mini-review examines the operational definitions for concepts like 'precision perioperative AI,' 'real-time inference,' and 'multimodal integration' within the constraints of perioperative care. The population of interest is perioperative patients, with applications spanning the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative phases. The review describes AI applications for preoperative risk stratification, intraoperative waveform-based early-warning systems and closed-loop controllers, and postoperative surveillance for deterioration and complications. No specific comparator, primary outcome, or sample size was reported for this review of the literature.
The review did not report specific numerical results, safety data, adverse events, or tolerability information. Its main contribution is a conceptual framework and critique of current research practices.
Key limitations identified include that the terms 'precision,' 'real-time,' and 'multimodal integration' are frequently invoked without operational definition. Furthermore, the authors argue many studies still prioritize retrospective discrimination over critical aspects like model calibration, workflow integration, and prospective clinical impact.
Regarding practice relevance, the authors conclude that perioperative AI must be evaluated as a clinical intervention rather than a static classifier. They propose deployment-grade requirements including robust calibration, external validation, decision-curve analysis, human-in-the-loop design, drift detection, and structured lifecycle oversight. Funding and conflicts of interest were not reported.
View Original Abstract ↓
Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly positioned as an assistive and decision-support layer across the perioperative pathway, transforming heterogeneous clinical data into patient-specific risk estimates and management recommendations. Yet perioperative AI remains conceptually fragmented: terms such as “precision,” “real-time,” and “multimodal integration” are frequently invoked without operational definition, and many studies still prioritize retrospective discrimination over calibration, workflow integration, and prospective clinical impact. This mini-review provides operational definitions for precision perioperative AI, real-time inference, and multimodal integration within the specific constraints of perioperative care, then synthesizes representative applications across the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative phases, emphasizing perioperative-specific evidence and implementation maturity. Preoperatively, machine-learning models trained on electronic health records and multimodal data can improve individualized risk stratification, supporting triage, shared decision-making, and tailored prehabilitation or monitoring strategies. Intraoperatively, waveform-based early-warning systems can reduce the duration and severity of hypotension when embedded in treatment protocols; reinforcement-learning approaches and closed-loop controllers are being explored for anesthetic depth and hemodynamic control. Computer vision applications include support for ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia and operating-room scene analysis. Postoperatively, AI-enhanced surveillance combines continuous monitoring with perioperative risk profiles to detect deterioration and forecast complications such as sepsis, acute kidney injury, and delirium. We argue that perioperative AI must be evaluated as a clinical intervention rather than a static classifier. Deployment-grade requirements include robust calibration, external validation, decision-curve analysis, human-in-the-loop design, drift detection, and structured lifecycle oversight (“algorithmovigilance”), aligned with emerging regulatory expectations and real-world perioperative workflows.