Omer T Inan1, Maziyar Baran Pouyan2, Abdul Q Javaid2, Sean Dowling2, Mozziyar Etemadi2, Alexis Dorier2, J Alex Heller2, A Ozan Bicen2, Shuvo Roy2, Teresa De Marco2, Liviu Klein2. 1. From the School of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta (O.T.I., M.B.P., A.Q.J., A.D., A.O.B.); Division of Cardiology (S.D., T.D.M., L.K.) and Department of Bioengineering and Therapeutic Sciences (S.R.), University of California, San Francisco; and Department of Anesthesiology and Department of Biomedical Engineering, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL (M.E., J.A.H.). inan@gatech.edu. 2. From the School of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta (O.T.I., M.B.P., A.Q.J., A.D., A.O.B.); Division of Cardiology (S.D., T.D.M., L.K.) and Department of Bioengineering and Therapeutic Sciences (S.R.), University of California, San Francisco; and Department of Anesthesiology and Department of Biomedical Engineering, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL (M.E., J.A.H.).
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Remote monitoring of patients with heart failure (HF) using wearable devices can allow patient-specific adjustments to treatments and thereby potentially reduce hospitalizations. We aimed to assess HF state using wearable measurements of electrical and mechanical aspects of cardiac function in the context of exercise. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with compensated (outpatient) and decompensated (hospitalized) HF were fitted with a wearable ECG and seismocardiogram sensing patch. Patients stood at rest for an initial recording, performed a 6-minute walk test, and then stood at rest for 5 minutes of recovery. The protocol was performed at the time of outpatient visit or at 2 time points (admission and discharge) during an HF hospitalization. To assess patient state, we devised a method based on comparing the similarity of the structure of seismocardiogram signals after exercise compared with rest using graph mining (graph similarity score). We found that graph similarity score can assess HF patient state and correlates to clinical improvement in 45 patients (13 decompensated, 32 compensated). A significant difference was found between the groups in the graph similarity score metric (44.4±4.9 [decompensated HF] versus 35.2±10.5 [compensated HF]; P<0.001). In the 6 decompensated patients with longitudinal data, we found a significant change in graph similarity score from admission (decompensated) to discharge (compensated; 44±4.1 [admitted] versus 35±3.9 [discharged]; P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Wearable technologies recording cardiac function and machine learning algorithms can assess compensated and decompensated HF states by analyzing cardiac response to submaximal exercise. These techniques can be tested in the future to track the clinical status of outpatients with HF and their response to pharmacological interventions.
BACKGROUND: Remote monitoring of patients with heart failure (HF) using wearable devices can allow patient-specific adjustments to treatments and thereby potentially reduce hospitalizations. We aimed to assess HF state using wearable measurements of electrical and mechanical aspects of cardiac function in the context of exercise. METHODS AND RESULTS:Patients with compensated (outpatient) and decompensated (hospitalized) HF were fitted with a wearable ECG and seismocardiogram sensing patch. Patients stood at rest for an initial recording, performed a 6-minute walk test, and then stood at rest for 5 minutes of recovery. The protocol was performed at the time of outpatient visit or at 2 time points (admission and discharge) during an HF hospitalization. To assess patient state, we devised a method based on comparing the similarity of the structure of seismocardiogram signals after exercise compared with rest using graph mining (graph similarity score). We found that graph similarity score can assess HF patient state and correlates to clinical improvement in 45 patients (13 decompensated, 32 compensated). A significant difference was found between the groups in the graph similarity score metric (44.4±4.9 [decompensated HF] versus 35.2±10.5 [compensated HF]; P<0.001). In the 6 decompensated patients with longitudinal data, we found a significant change in graph similarity score from admission (decompensated) to discharge (compensated; 44±4.1 [admitted] versus 35±3.9 [discharged]; P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Wearable technologies recording cardiac function and machine learning algorithms can assess compensated and decompensated HF states by analyzing cardiac response to submaximal exercise. These techniques can be tested in the future to track the clinical status of outpatients with HF and their response to pharmacological interventions.
Authors: Milton Packer; William T Abraham; Mandeep R Mehra; Clyde W Yancy; Christine E Lawless; Judith E Mitchell; Frank W Smart; Rachel Bijou; Christopher M O'Connor; Barry M Massie; Ileana L Pina; Barry H Greenberg; James B Young; Daniel P Fishbein; Paul J Hauptman; Robert C Bourge; John E Strobeck; Srinvivas Murali; Douglas Schocken; John R Teerlink; Wayne C Levy; Robin J Trupp; Marc A Silver Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2006-05-15 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Andrew P Ambrosy; Peter S Pang; Sadiya Khan; Marvin A Konstam; Gregg C Fonarow; Brian Traver; Aldo P Maggioni; Thomas Cook; Karl Swedberg; John C Burnett; Liliana Grinfeld; James E Udelson; Faiez Zannad; Mihai Gheorghiade Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2013-01-04 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: A E Steimle; L W Stevenson; C Chelimsky-Fallick; G C Fonarow; M A Hamilton; J D Moriguchi; A Kartashov; J H Tillisch Journal: Circulation Date: 1997-08-19 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Wendy A Gattis; Christopher M O'Connor; Dianne S Gallup; Vic Hasselblad; Mihai Gheorghiade Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2004-05-05 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: J G F Cleland; K Swedberg; F Follath; M Komajda; A Cohen-Solal; J C Aguilar; R Dietz; A Gavazzi; R Hobbs; J Korewicki; H C Madeira; V S Moiseyev; I Preda; W H van Gilst; J Widimsky; N Freemantle; Joanne Eastaugh; J Mason Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2003-03 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: G Michael Felker; Tariq Ahmad; Kevin J Anstrom; Kirkwood F Adams; Lawton S Cooper; Justin A Ezekowitz; Mona Fiuzat; Nancy Houston-Miller; James L Januzzi; Eric S Leifer; Daniel B Mark; Patrice Desvigne-Nickens; Gayle Paynter; Ileana L Piña; David J Whellan; Christopher M O'Connor Journal: JACC Heart Fail Date: 2014-09-03 Impact factor: 12.035
Authors: Jay Ritzema; Iain C Melton; A Mark Richards; Ian G Crozier; Chris Frampton; Robert N Doughty; James Whiting; Saibal Kar; Neal Eigler; Henry Krum; William T Abraham; Richard W Troughton Journal: Circulation Date: 2007-12-03 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Varol Burak Aydemir; Supriya Nagesh; Md Mobashir Hasan Shandhi; Joanna Fan; Liviu Klein; Mozziyar Etemadi; James Alex Heller; Omer T Inan; James M Rehg Journal: IEEE Trans Biomed Eng Date: 2019-08-15 Impact factor: 4.538
Authors: Jonathan Zia; Jacob Kimball; Sinan Hersek; Md Mobashir Hasan Shandhi; Beren Semiz; Omer T Inan Journal: IEEE J Biomed Health Inform Date: 2019-07-26 Impact factor: 5.772
Authors: Ethan M I Johnson; J Alex Heller; Florencia Garcia Vicente; Roberto Sarnari; Daniel Gordon; Patrick M McCarthy; Alex J Barker; Mozziyar Etemadi; Michael Markl Journal: Ann Biomed Eng Date: 2020-03-16 Impact factor: 3.934
Authors: Beren Semiz; Andrew M Carek; Jessica C Johnson; Shireen Ahmad; J Alex Heller; Florencia G Vicente; Stacey Caron; Charles W Hogue; Mozziyar Etemadi; Omer T Inan Journal: IEEE J Biomed Health Inform Date: 2021-05-11 Impact factor: 5.772