| Literature DB >> 28754888 |
Mojtaba Jafari Tadi1,2, Eero Lehtonen3, Antti Saraste4,5, Jarno Tuominen3, Juho Koskinen3, Mika Teräs6,7, Juhani Airaksinen4,5, Mikko Pänkäälä3, Tero Koivisto3.
Abstract
Gyrocardiography (GCG) is a new non-invasive technique for assessing heart motions by using a sensor of angular motion - gyroscope - attached to the skin of the chest. In this study, we conducted simultaneous recordings of electrocardiography (ECG), GCG, and echocardiography in a group of subjects consisting of nine healthy volunteer men. Annotation of underlying fiducial points in GCG is presented and compared to opening and closing points of heart valves measured by a pulse wave Doppler. Comparison between GCG and synchronized tissue Doppler imaging (TDI) data shows that the GCG signal is also capable of providing temporal information on the systolic and early diastolic peak velocities of the myocardium. Furthermore, time intervals from the ECG Q-wave to the maximum of the integrated GCG (angular displacement) signal and maximal myocardial strain curves obtained by 3D speckle tracking are correlated. We see GCG as a promising mechanical cardiac monitoring tool that enables quantification of beat-by-beat dynamics of systolic time intervals (STI) related to hemodynamic variables and myocardial contractility.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28754888 PMCID: PMC5533710 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-07248-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Simultaneous data acquisition from echocardiography, ECG, and MEMS sensors. General schematics of MEMS motion processing system (A) and echocardiography set up including MEMS sensors and ECG (B).
Demographic information and descriptive analysis of the echocardiography characteristics.
| Demographic information | Min | Max | Mean | ±SD | Echocardiography characteristics | Min | Max | Mean | ±SD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 23 | 46 | 31 | 8.3 | LVEDV (ml) | 67 | 154 | 118 | 25 |
| Height (cm) | 172 | 186 | 179 | 4.7 | LVESV (ml) | 31 | 58 | 47 | 8 |
| Weight (kg) | 70 | 85 | 76 | 5.8 | EF (%) | 54 | 63 | 59 | 3 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 21.6 | 26.12 | 23.8 | 1.5 | SV (ml) | 59 | 96 | 73 | 13 |
| Blood Pressure (mmHg) | 119/70 | 165/87 | 130/77 | 14/5 | CO (l/min) | 3.1 | 5.1 | 4 | 0.75 |
*LVEDV = left ventricular end diastolic volume; LVESV = left ventricular end systolic volume; EF = ejection fraction; SV = stroke volume; CO = cardiac output; BP = blood pressure.
Figure 2Typical three dimensional GCG waveforms from x, y, and z axes of rotation. 3-axis GCG morphologies and reference ECG (A). 3-axis ensemble averaged GCG morphologies (B). GCG y-axis waveforms obtained using different sensors (C).
Figure 3Waveform annotation and cardiac time interval estimation in GCG signal. Aortic (left) and mitral (right) valve opening and closure moments as measured by PW Doppler and correspondingly in GCG signal (A). Waveform annotation in GCG and corresponding time intervals with respect to ECG peaks (B).
Figure 4Correlation and Bland-Altman plots. The red color dashed lines drawn in Bland-Altman plots represent the upper and lower LoA ranges for the measured cardiac time intervals. RPC is the reproducibility coefficient value which is the maximum difference that is likely to occur between different observations. The coefficient of variation (CV) percentage is the ratio of the standard deviation and the overall mean.
US and GCG derived information for underlying cardiac time intervals.
| US | Mean ± SD | GCG | Mean ± SD | r2 | RMSE |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR (bpm) | 59 ± 12 | HR | 58 ± 11 | 0.99 | 0.95 |
| R-MVC (ms) | 20 ± 6 | R- | 18 ± 5 | 0.66 | 3.5 |
| R-AVO (ms) | 49 ± 10 | R- | 47 ± 10 | 0.96 | 2.2 |
| R-AVC (ms) | 359 ± 32 | R- | 358 ± 36 | 0.95 | 7.5 |
| R-MVO (ms) | 427 ± 44 | R- | 432 ± 41 | 0.97 | 7.6 |
| IVCT (ms) | 29 ± 12 | IVCT | 30 ± 10 | 0.85 | 4.5 |
| IVRT (ms) | 68 ± 14 | IVRT | 74 ± 9 | 0.59 | 9.4 |
| QS2 (ms) | 393 ± 34 | QS2 | 394 ± 38 | 0.78 | 19 |
| LVET (ms) | 310 ± 26 | LVET | 310 ± 32 | 0.93 | 7.7 |
| PEP (ms) | 82 ± 10 | PEP | 83 ± 8 | 0.84 | 4.5 |
| Q-Sa (ms) | 134 ± 20 | Q-SPV | 132 ± 26 | 0.89 | 7.6 |
| Q-Ea (ms) | 467 ± 44 | Q-DPV | 460 ± 49 | 0.87 | 16 |
| Q-Max Strain (ms) | 367 ± 32 | Q-Max Ang Disp | 371 ± 31 | 0.91 | 10 |
Figure 5Sa and Ea wave evaluations with TDI and GCG. Qualitative comparison between the TDI Sa and Ea waves and corresponding SPV and DPV in typical GCG y- and z-axis waves (A). Quantitative evaluation of time intervals between Q-Sa/Ea versus Q-SPV/DPV waves (B).
Figure 6Myocardium tissue velocity, displacement, and strain analysis using TDI and corresponding GCG based angular rates (y-axis). Tissue velocity and displacement using TDI and 3D speckle tracking strain in longitudinal, circumferential and radial directions (A). Electromechanical delays measured by TDI and GCG (B). Relationship between the GCG and TDI electromechanical delays (C).
Figure 7Visual comparison of GCG and SCG signals. Evaluation of signal quality in typical tri-axial SCG and GCG waveforms (A). Intersubject variability comparison for GCG against SCG (B).