Key result
Common critical illness medications confound HRV interpretation, hindering its reliability as an ICU biomarker.
Why the study?
Translation of HRV-based prediction models into routine ICU practice has been limited because existing studies rarely account for medication effects that alter autonomic tone.
Design
Review
Requires caution using HRV as ICU biomarker; challenges its reliability and necessitates medication integration into future predictive models.
Heart rate variability (HRV) reflects autonomic nervous system function and has emerged as a potential noninvasive biomarker for early detection of physiologic deterioration in critical illness. HRV-based prediction models show promise; however, translation into routine ICU practice has been limited. A major barrier is the insufficient characterization of medication effects on HRV. Pharmacologic agents commonly used in critical care, including vasopressors, steroids, and antiarrhythmics, can directly or indirectly alter autonomic tone, yet existing studies rarely account for these influences. As a result, medication-induced HRV changes may represent meaningful therapeutic response or misleading confounding noise, complicating interpretation. Current studies do not adequately account for medication exposure when evaluating HRV in critical illness. We outline research priorities focused on quantifying medication effects, integrating medication exposure into predictive modeling, evaluating HRV as a marker of treatment response, and determining the utility of HRV as a treatment target.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Henry et al. (2026) studied this question. Medications commonly used in critical illness significantly confound heart rate variability interpretation, hindering its use as a reliable biomarker in the ICU.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: