Evidence Hub

Artificial intelligence in cardiopulmonary resuscitation: a systematic review

Silva DO, Pretto G, Dominici S, Brandão ACA, Brandão ACA, Leal PDC

Brazilian journal of anesthesiology (Elsevier), 2026

35 participants

Abstract

Cardiac arrest remains a major cause of mortality and neurological disability, and its management depends on rapid recognition, effective resuscitation, and accurate post-arrest prognostication. Artificial intelligence (AI) has been increasingly investigated as a tool to support these stages of care. This narrative review summarizes recent evidence on AI applications in cardiac arrest, including prediction, recognition, intra-arrest support, prognostication, and cardiovascular risk stratification. Searches were conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, Google Scholar, EMBASE, Scopus, IEEE Xplore, and ScienceDirect for studies published from January 2000 to June 2025. Studies addressing AI, machine learning, or deep learning in cardiac arrest-related contexts were descriptively synthesized according to clinical application, AI methodology, and care setting. Overall, 59 studies were included. Six application categories were identified: early prediction of cardiac arrest or clinical deterioration (n = 16), cardiac arrest recognition and emergency response activation (n = 3), intra-arrest CPR and defibrillation support (n = 6), post-cardiac arrest prognostication (n = 20), risk stratification for sudden cardiac death and malignant arrhythmias (n = 11), and related cardiovascular or perioperative prognostic models (n = 3). Deep learning and neural-network-based approaches were the most frequent methodologies (n = 35), followed by traditional machine learning (n = 18) and natural language…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in computer models (in silico), not in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health. Reported size: 35 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free