| Literature DB >> 29785154 |
Ram Sewak Singh1, Barjinder Singh Saini1, Ramesh Kumar Sunkaria1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Cardiovascular diseases generate the highest mortality in the globe population, mainly due to coronary artery disease (CAD) like arrhythmia, myocardial infarction and heart failure. Therefore, an early identification of CAD and diagnosis is essential. For this, we have proposed a new approach to detect the CAD patients using heart rate variability (HRV) signals. This approach is based on subspaces decomposition of HRV signals using multiscale wavelet packet (MSWP) transform and entropy features extracted from decomposed HRV signals. The detection performance was analyzed using Fisher ranking method, generalized discriminant analysis (GDA) and binary classifier as extreme learning machine (ELM). The ranking strategies designate rank to the available features extracted by entropy methods from decomposed heart rate variability (HRV) signals and organize them according to their clinical importance. The GDA diminishes the dimension of ranked features. In addition, it can enhance the classification accuracy by picking the best discerning of ranked features. The main advantage of ELM is that the hidden layer does not require tuning and it also has a fast rate of detection.Entities:
Keywords: Kraskov nearest neighbour entropy (K-NNE); extreme learning machine (ELM); fuzzy entropy (FZE); generalized discriminant analysis (GDA); multiscale wavelet packet (MSWP) transform
Year: 2018 PMID: 29785154 PMCID: PMC5958981 DOI: 10.15386/cjmed-882
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Clujul Med ISSN: 1222-2119
Figure 1Flow chart of proposed algorithm for detection of CAD and normal subjects.
Figure 2Example of decomposition of MSWP for 3 levels, vertical axis and horizontal axis shows level of decomposition and frequency variety as a fraction of the Nyquist frequency. The λ1,0, λ1,1……….. λ1,1 represents detail and approximation components of HRV signals.
Figure 3A brief descriptions with proper labeling of box plot.
The Mean and standard deviation (S d.) and corresponding p-Value of the top ten ranked features extracted by FZE and K-NNE from 4-level decomposition of HRV signals by MSWP transform for NSR-CAD and Self_NSR-CAD data set. Top ten ranked features arrange on the basis of highest Fisher score to low score (top to bottom, 1st and 5th column) in the table for both data set. L indicates the level of decomposition; App. represents approximate coefficient and Det. represents detail coefficient of decomposed subspace signals. For statistical significance, if p>0.05: not significant, p≤0.05: significant and p<0.01: very significant.
| Features-Level/Approximate or Detail coefficient | NSR (Mean ± S d.) | CAD (Mean ± S d.) | p-Value | Features-Level/Approximate or Detail coefficient | Self-NSR (Mean ± S d.) | CAD (Mean± S d.) | p-Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FZE-L4-App. | 0.038±0.017 | 0.12±0.081 | 1.30E-12 | K-NNE-L4-App. | −2.938±0.666 | −1.727±1 | 3.71E-08 |
| FZE-L4-Det. | 0.033±0.016 | 0.105±0.071 | 1.74E-12 | FZE-L4-Det. | 0.029±0.013 | 0.101±0.07 | 2.87E-07 |
| FZE-L4-Det. | 0.03±0.015 | 0.101±0.07 | 9.99E-10 | FZE-L3-Det. | 0.021±0.01 | 0.08±0.058 | 2.33E-07 |
| FZE-L4-App. | 0.039±0.019 | 0.115±0.076 | 1.05E-10 | FZE-L2-Det. | 0.016±0.008 | 0.062±0.047 | 2.15E-05 |
| FZE-L4-App. | 0.036±0.016 | 0.123±0.088 | 2.19E-10 | FZE-L1-App. | 0.011±0.006 | 0.048±0.037 | 1.7E-04 |
| K-NNE-L4-App. | −2.931±0.737 | −1.72±1.004 | 1.61E-10 | K-NNE-L4-App. | −2.857±0.661 | −1.72±1.004 | 9.6 E-07 |
| FZE-L3-App. | 0.025±0.015 | 0.082±0.056 | 2.23E-09 | FZE-L4-App. | 0.038±0.021 | 0.123±0.088 | 8.30E-07 |
| FZE-L3-Det. | 0.023±0.015 | 0.08±0.058 | 1.26 E-09 | FZE-L3-App. | 0.028±0.014 | 0.082±0.056 | 8.23 E-07 |
| K-NNE-L4-Det. | −3.062±0.891 | −1.761±1.041 | 3.18E-09 | FZE-L4-Det. | 0.037±0.018 | 0.105±0.071 | 9.38 E-06 |
| K-NNE-L3-App. | −3.409±0.891 | −2.108±1.041 | 3.18E-09 | K-NNE-L3-Det. | −3.691±0.733 | −2.293±1.343 | 5.86E-06 |
Figure 4Box plot of top ten ranked features extracted by non-linear FZE and K-NNE method from decomposed HRV signals by MSWP for NSR-CAD data set.
Figure 5Plots depicting detection accuracies for different number of top ten ranked features with GDA + ELM, LDA+ ELM having different kernel functions and hidden nodes and ELM having hidden nodes as sigmoid and multiquadric for (a) NSR- CAD (b) Self_NSR-CAD.
An ephemeral summary and assessment of the classification accuracy of the proposed work with the existing work.
| Authors | Methods | Features | Classifier | Accuracy % |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Karimi et al. [ | DWT, HSS and WPT | Several statistical features | ANN | 90 |
| Lee et al. [ | Nonlinear methods, Linear, and reduced features by t-test | 5 nonlinear features and 6 Linear | SVM | 90 |
| Babak et al. [ | Linear, non linear methods and features reduced by GDA and LDA | 7 time domain, 1 frequency and 7 non-linear | SVM | 95.77 |
| Zhao and Ma [ | EMD, and TEO | Several statistical features | BPNN | 85 |
| Babaoglu et al. [ | GA, EST and BPSO | 11 Features | SVM | 81.46 |
| Babaoglu et al. [ | EST and features reduced by PCA | 18 Features | SVM | 79.17 |
| Dua et al. [ | Features reduced by PCA | 6 Nonlinear features | MLP | 89.5 |
| Giri et al. [ | DWT, features reduced by ICA, | 10 Features | GMM | 96.8 |
| Patidar et al. [ | TQWT and features reduced by PCA | 2 Entropy features | LS-SVM with Morlet wavelet kernel | 99.72 |
| Nan Liu et al. [ | Selective and total segments | Linear and frequency feat | ELM & SVM | 68.48 & 71.20 |
| Mohit et al. [ | FAWT and ranking method like Entropy, ROC and Bhattacharya | FzEn and K-NN Entropy estimator | LS-SVM with RBF & Morlet wavelet kernel | 100 |
| Monappa et al. [ | Linear and non-linear, features reduced by PCA | Various time domain, Frequency domain and non-linear domain | PNN, KNN and SVM | Without PCA: 68.33, 76.67 and 90.00 |
| This work | MSWP transform, Fisher ranking method and features reduced by GDA,LDA | 31 features by K-NNE & 31 features by FZE method. | ELM | 100 |