Literature DB >> 34689629

Optimal ECG-lead selection increases generalizability of deep learning on ECG abnormality classification.

Changxin Lai1,2, Shijie Zhou1,2, Natalia A Trayanova1,2.   

Abstract

Deep learning (DL) has achieved promising performance in detecting common abnormalities from the 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG). However, diagnostic redundancy exists in the 12-lead ECG, which could impose a systematic overfitting on DL, causing poor generalization. We, therefore, hypothesized that finding an optimal lead subset of the 12-lead ECG to eliminate the redundancy would help improve the generalizability of DL-based models. In this study, we developed and evaluated a DL-based model that has a feature extraction stage, an ECG-lead subset selection stage and a decision-making stage to automatically interpret multiple common ECG abnormality types. The data analysed in this study consisted of 6877 12-lead ECG recordings from CPSC 2018 (labelled as normal rhythm or eight types of ECG abnormalities, split into training (approx. 80%), validation (approx. 10%) and test (approx. 10%) sets) and 3998 12-lead ECG recordings from PhysioNet/CinC 2020 (labelled as normal rhythm or four types of ECG abnormalities, used as external text set). The ECG-lead subset selection module was introduced within the proposed model to efficiently constrain model complexity. It detected an optimal 4-lead ECG subset consisting of leads II, aVR, V1 and V4. The proposed model using the optimal 4-lead subset significantly outperformed the model using the complete 12-lead ECG on the validation set and on the external test dataset. The results demonstrated that our proposed model successfully identified an optimal subset of 12-lead ECG; the resulting 4-lead ECG subset improves the generalizability of the DL model in ECG abnormality interpretation. This study provides an outlook on what channels are necessary to keep and which ones may be ignored when considering an automated detection system for cardiac ECG abnormalities. This article is part of the theme issue 'Advanced computation in cardiovascular physiology: new challenges and opportunities'.

Entities:  

Keywords:  arrhythmias; deep learning; electrocardiogram; subset selection

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34689629      PMCID: PMC8805596          DOI: 10.1098/rsta.2020.0258

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci        ISSN: 1364-503X            Impact factor:   4.226


  21 in total

1.  PhysioBank, PhysioToolkit, and PhysioNet: components of a new research resource for complex physiologic signals.

Authors:  A L Goldberger; L A Amaral; L Glass; J M Hausdorff; P C Ivanov; R G Mark; J E Mietus; G B Moody; C K Peng; H E Stanley
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2000-06-13       Impact factor: 29.690

2.  Automatic classification of heartbeats using ECG morphology and heartbeat interval features.

Authors:  Philip de Chazal; Maria O'Dwyer; Richard B Reilly
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 4.538

Review 3.  Electrocardiographic applications of lead aVR.

Authors:  Kelly Williamson; Amal Mattu; Claire U Plautz; Allan Binder; William J Brady
Journal:  Am J Emerg Med       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 2.469

4.  Classification of electrocardiogram signals with support vector machines and particle swarm optimization.

Authors:  Farid Melgani; Yakoub Bazi
Journal:  IEEE Trans Inf Technol Biomed       Date:  2008-09

5.  Optimization of ECG classification by means of feature selection.

Authors:  Tanis Mar; Sebastian Zaunseder; Juan Pablo Martínez; Mariano Llamedo; Rüdiger Poll
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  2011-02-10       Impact factor: 4.538

6.  Long short-term memory.

Authors:  S Hochreiter; J Schmidhuber
Journal:  Neural Comput       Date:  1997-11-15       Impact factor: 2.026

Review 7.  Deep learning.

Authors:  Yann LeCun; Yoshua Bengio; Geoffrey Hinton
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2015-05-28       Impact factor: 49.962

Review 8.  Computational techniques for ECG analysis and interpretation in light of their contribution to medical advances.

Authors:  Aurore Lyon; Ana Mincholé; Juan Pablo Martínez; Pablo Laguna; Blanca Rodriguez
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2018-01       Impact factor: 4.118

9.  Cardiologist-level arrhythmia detection and classification in ambulatory electrocardiograms using a deep neural network.

Authors:  Awni Y Hannun; Pranav Rajpurkar; Masoumeh Haghpanahi; Geoffrey H Tison; Codie Bourn; Mintu P Turakhia; Andrew Y Ng
Journal:  Nat Med       Date:  2019-01-07       Impact factor: 53.440

10.  Recurrent atrial fibrillation/flutter detection after ablation or cardioversion using the AliveCor KardiaMobile device: iHEART results.

Authors:  Isaac L Goldenthal; Robert R Sciacca; Teresa Riga; Suzanne Bakken; Maurita Baumeister; Angelo B Biviano; Jose M Dizon; Daniel Wang; Ketty C Wang; William Whang; Kathleen T Hickey; Hasan Garan
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol       Date:  2019-09-25
View more
  2 in total

1.  Training machine learning models with synthetic data improves the prediction of ventricular origin in outflow tract ventricular arrhythmias.

Authors:  Ruben Doste; Miguel Lozano; Guillermo Jimenez-Perez; Lluis Mont; Antonio Berruezo; Diego Penela; Oscar Camara; Rafael Sebastian
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2022-08-12       Impact factor: 4.755

Review 2.  State-of-the-Art Deep Learning Methods on Electrocardiogram Data: Systematic Review.

Authors:  Georgios Petmezas; Leandros Stefanopoulos; Vassilis Kilintzis; Andreas Tzavelis; John A Rogers; Aggelos K Katsaggelos; Nicos Maglaveras
Journal:  JMIR Med Inform       Date:  2022-08-15
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.