Artificial intelligence in clinical thrombosis and hemostasis: A review

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q2 HEMATOLOGY
Yi Kiat Isaac Kuan , Yixin Jamie Kok , Nigel Sheng Hui Liu , Brandon Jin An Ong , Ying Jie Chee , Chuanhui Xu , Minyang Chow , Kollengode Ramanathan , Rinkoo Dalan , Prahlad Ho , Bingwen Eugene Fan
{"title":"Artificial intelligence in clinical thrombosis and hemostasis: A review","authors":"Yi Kiat Isaac Kuan ,&nbsp;Yixin Jamie Kok ,&nbsp;Nigel Sheng Hui Liu ,&nbsp;Brandon Jin An Ong ,&nbsp;Ying Jie Chee ,&nbsp;Chuanhui Xu ,&nbsp;Minyang Chow ,&nbsp;Kollengode Ramanathan ,&nbsp;Rinkoo Dalan ,&nbsp;Prahlad Ho ,&nbsp;Bingwen Eugene Fan","doi":"10.1016/j.rpth.2025.102984","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Artificial Intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) are transforming hemostasis and thrombosis care, with applications spanning disease detection, risk assessment, laboratory testing, patient education, personalized medicine, and drug development. This narrative review explores AI’s clinical utility and limitations across these 6 domains.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, and Scopus (up to February 2025) was conducted using terms related to AI, thrombosis, and hemostasis. Peer-reviewed, English-language studies were included, supplemented by manual and reference screening. Of 84 studies included, 38 focused on risk assessment, 16 on diagnostics, and others on personalized medicine, drug development, and patient engagement.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>AI demonstrated high accuracy in diagnosing thrombotic events via imaging and electronic health record analysis, although sensitivity gaps persisted for complex cases. In laboratory settings, AI outperformed manual review in detecting errors (eg, sample mislabeling and clotted specimens). Risk stratification models surpassed traditional scores (eg, CHA<sub>2</sub>DS<sub>2</sub>-VASc) in predicting thromboembolism, yet inconsistently performed in cancer-associated thrombosis. Personalized anticoagulation dosing and genetic severity prediction in hemophilia highlighted AI’s precision. Chatbots and adherence tools have enhanced patient education while AI-driven drug discovery identified novel anticoagulants and repurposed existing therapies. Limitations included variable external validation, “black box” interpretability issues, and dataset biases.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>AI offers significant promise for improving diagnostics, risk prediction, and individualized therapy in thrombosis and haemostasis. Future integration depends on transparent, validated, and equitable AI systems embedded within clinical workflows.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":20893,"journal":{"name":"Research and Practice in Thrombosis and Haemostasis","volume":"9 5","pages":"Article 102984"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research and Practice in Thrombosis and Haemostasis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2475037925003085","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Artificial Intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) are transforming hemostasis and thrombosis care, with applications spanning disease detection, risk assessment, laboratory testing, patient education, personalized medicine, and drug development. This narrative review explores AI’s clinical utility and limitations across these 6 domains.

Methods

A comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, and Scopus (up to February 2025) was conducted using terms related to AI, thrombosis, and hemostasis. Peer-reviewed, English-language studies were included, supplemented by manual and reference screening. Of 84 studies included, 38 focused on risk assessment, 16 on diagnostics, and others on personalized medicine, drug development, and patient engagement.

Results

AI demonstrated high accuracy in diagnosing thrombotic events via imaging and electronic health record analysis, although sensitivity gaps persisted for complex cases. In laboratory settings, AI outperformed manual review in detecting errors (eg, sample mislabeling and clotted specimens). Risk stratification models surpassed traditional scores (eg, CHA2DS2-VASc) in predicting thromboembolism, yet inconsistently performed in cancer-associated thrombosis. Personalized anticoagulation dosing and genetic severity prediction in hemophilia highlighted AI’s precision. Chatbots and adherence tools have enhanced patient education while AI-driven drug discovery identified novel anticoagulants and repurposed existing therapies. Limitations included variable external validation, “black box” interpretability issues, and dataset biases.

Conclusion

AI offers significant promise for improving diagnostics, risk prediction, and individualized therapy in thrombosis and haemostasis. Future integration depends on transparent, validated, and equitable AI systems embedded within clinical workflows.
人工智能在临床血栓和止血中的应用综述
人工智能(AI)和机器学习(ML)正在改变止血和血栓治疗,其应用涵盖疾病检测、风险评估、实验室测试、患者教育、个性化医疗和药物开发。这篇叙述性综述探讨了人工智能在这6个领域的临床应用和局限性。方法综合检索PubMed、Embase和Scopus(截至2025年2月),检索AI、血栓形成和止血相关术语。纳入了同行评议的英语研究,并辅以手工和参考文献筛选。在纳入的84项研究中,38项侧重于风险评估,16项侧重于诊断,其他研究侧重于个性化医疗、药物开发和患者参与。结果通过影像学和电子病历分析诊断血栓事件具有较高的准确性,但对复杂病例的敏感性存在差距。在实验室环境中,人工智能在检测错误(例如,样品错误标记和凝固标本)方面优于人工审查。风险分层模型在预测血栓栓塞方面优于传统评分(如CHA2DS2-VASc),但在癌症相关血栓形成方面表现不一致。个性化抗凝剂量和血友病遗传严重程度预测突出了人工智能的准确性。聊天机器人和依从性工具加强了患者教育,而人工智能驱动的药物发现发现了新的抗凝血剂,并改变了现有疗法的用途。限制包括可变的外部验证、“黑盒”可解释性问题和数据集偏差。结论人工智能在改善血栓和止血的诊断、风险预测和个体化治疗方面具有重要的应用前景。未来的整合取决于在临床工作流程中嵌入透明、有效和公平的人工智能系统。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
13.00%
发文量
212
审稿时长
7 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信