| Literature DB >> 31947905 |
Florent Baty1, Maximilian Boesch1, Sandra Widmer1, Simon Annaheim2, Piero Fontana2, Martin Camenzind2, René M Rossi2, Otto D Schoch1, Martin H Brutsche1.
Abstract
Sleep apnea (SA) is a prevalent disorder diagnosed by polysomnography (PSG) based on the number of apnea-hypopnea events per hour of sleep (apnea-hypopnea index, AHI). PSG is expensive and technically complex; therefore, its use is rather limited to the initial diagnostic phase and simpler devices are required for long-term follow-up. The validity of single-parameter wearable devices for the assessment of sleep apnea severity is still debated. In this context, a wearable electrocardiogram (ECG) acquisition system (ECG belt) was developed and its suitability for the classification of sleep apnea severity was investigated using heart rate variability analysis with or without data pre-filtering. Several classification algorithms were compared and support vector machine was preferred due to its simplicity and overall performance. Whole-night ECG signals from 241 patients with a suspicion of sleep apnea were recorded using both the ECG belt and patched ECG during PSG recordings. 65% of patients had an obstructive sleep apnea and the median AHI was 21 [IQR: 7-40] h - 1 . The classification accuracy obtained from the ECG belt (accuracy: 72%, sensitivity: 70%, specificity: 74%) was comparable to the patched ECG (accuracy: 74%, sensitivity: 88%, specificity: 61%). The highest classification accuracy was obtained for the discrimination between individuals with no or mild SA vs. moderate to severe SA. In conclusion, the ECG belt provided signals comparable to patched ECG and could be used for the assessment of sleep apnea severity, especially during follow-up.Entities:
Keywords: ECG signal; classification algorithms; heart rate variability analysis; sleep apnea; support vector machine; wearable acquisition device
Year: 2020 PMID: 31947905 PMCID: PMC6983183 DOI: 10.3390/s20010286
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Patient characteristics. Results are reported as median [inter-quartile range (IQR)], unless otherwise specified.
| Characteristics | |
|---|---|
| Subjects, | 241 |
| Female/male | 57/184 |
| Age, yr | 52 [IQR: 42 to 60] |
| BMI (kg/ | 45 [IQR: 27 to 61] |
| AHI, | 21 [IQR: 7 to 40.2] |
| ODI, | 17 [IQR: 4.7 to 37] |
| ESS, score | 9 [IQR: 6 to 12] |
| Obstructive | 157 |
| Central | 5 |
| Mixed | 35 |
| No apnea detected | 44 |
BMI: body mass index; AHI: Apnea/hypopnea index; ODI: oxygen desaturation index; ESS: Epworth sleepiness scale.
Figure 1PCA biplot representation of the HRV features (red arrows) and patient information (empty circles) derived from filtered ECG belt data. External explanatory variables including patient baseline characteristics were fitted to the PCA for interpretation purposes and represented by blue arrows oriented towards the direction of maximum correlation (inset on the upper left corner).
Figure 2ROC curves displaying the comparison of the classification performance of four different algorithms with respect to sleep apnea severity (apnea–hypopnea index, AHI). The algorithms included support vector machine (SVM), linear discriminant analysis (LDA), -nearest neighbour (KNN) and orthogonal partial least squares.
Figure 3Predictive and diagnostic accuracy of the HRV features with regards to AHI, ODI and ESS. The predictive accuracy of the HRV features is provided by surface fitting applied to PCA (left panels). The isoclines (blue lines) superimposed to the PCA biplot display the linear relationship (trend surface) between HRV features and the responses (AHI, ODI, ESS; blue arrows). The diagnostic accuracy is shown by means of ROC curve displaying the sensitivity vs. false positive rate of a support vector machine-based AHI classifier (right panels). The curves are derived from ECG data obtained during PSG and ECG belt with or without data pre-filtering. The diagonal line indicates the random guess line. The dotted lines of the upper right panel cross at the optimal classification accuracy for AHI (AHI = 18 ).