C Michael Gibson1, Sameer Mehta2, Mariana R S Ceschim3, Alejandra Frauenfelder4, Daniel Vieira5, Roberto Botelho6, Francisco Fernandez7, Carlos Villagran8, Sebastian Niklitschek8, Cristina I Matheus9, Gladys Pinto10, Isabella Vallenilla11, Claudia Lopez12, Maria I Acosta13, Anibal Munguia14, Clara Fitzgerald15, Jorge Mazzini16, Lorena Pisana17, Samantha Quintero18. 1. Cardiovascular Division, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. Electronic address: charlesmichaelgibson@gmail.com. 2. Lumen Foundation, Division of Telemedicine & Artificial Intelligence, Miami, FL, USA. Electronic address: sameer.lumenglobal@gmail.com. 3. Lumen Foundation, Division of Telemedicine & Artificial Intelligence, Miami, FL, USA. Electronic address: marianaceschim@outlook.com. 4. Lumen Foundation, Division of Telemedicine & Artificial Intelligence, Miami, FL, USA. Electronic address: lelefs1792@gmail.com. 5. Lumen Foundation, Division of Telemedicine & Artificial Intelligence, Miami, FL, USA. Electronic address: davie889@hotmail.com. 6. Lumen Foundation, Division of Telemedicine & Artificial Intelligence, Miami, FL, USA; Triangulo Heart Institute, Uberlandia, MG, Brazil. 7. Cardionomous, Santiago, Chile. Electronic address: francisco.fernandez@me.com. 8. Cardionomous, Santiago, Chile. 9. Lumen Foundation, Division of Telemedicine & Artificial Intelligence, Miami, FL, USA. Electronic address: mfcris2@hotmail.com. 10. Lumen Foundation, Division of Telemedicine & Artificial Intelligence, Miami, FL, USA. Electronic address: gladyspinto93@gmail.com. 11. Lumen Foundation, Division of Telemedicine & Artificial Intelligence, Miami, FL, USA. Electronic address: isabellavallenilla@hotmail.com. 12. Lumen Foundation, Division of Telemedicine & Artificial Intelligence, Miami, FL, USA. Electronic address: dra.claudia.lopez@outlook.com. 13. Lumen Foundation, Division of Telemedicine & Artificial Intelligence, Miami, FL, USA. Electronic address: maria_isabel_aco@yahoo.com. 14. Lumen Foundation, Division of Telemedicine & Artificial Intelligence, Miami, FL, USA. Electronic address: anibal.munguia@yahoo.com. 15. Cardiovascular Division, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. Electronic address: clarajeannemarie@gmail.com. 16. Lumen Foundation, Division of Telemedicine & Artificial Intelligence, Miami, FL, USA. Electronic address: georgemazzi14@gmail.com. 17. Lumen Foundation, Division of Telemedicine & Artificial Intelligence, Miami, FL, USA. Electronic address: lorenapisana@gmail.com. 18. Lumen Foundation, Division of Telemedicine & Artificial Intelligence, Miami, FL, USA. Electronic address: samigabi93@gmail.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: While ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI) door-to-balloon times are often below 90 min, symptom to door times remain long at 2.5-h, due at least in part to a delay in diagnosis. OBJECTIVES: To develop and validate a machine learning-guided algorithm which uses a single‑lead electrocardiogram (ECG) for STEMI detection to speed diagnosis. METHODS: Data was extracted from the Latin America Telemedicine Infarct Network (LATIN), a population-based Acute Myocardial Infarction (AMI) program that provides care to patients in Brazil, Colombia, Mexico, and Argentina through telemedicine. SAMPLE: the first dataset was comprised of 8511 ECGs that were used for various machine learning experiments to test our Deep Learning approach for STEMI diagnosis. The second dataset of 2542 confirmed STEMI diagnosis EKG records, including specific ischemic heart wall information (anterior, inferior, and lateral), was derived from the previous dataset to test the STEMI localization model. Preprocessing: Detection of QRS complexes by wavelet system, segmentation of each EKG record into individual heartbeats with fixed window of 0.4 s to the left and 0.9 s to the right of main. Training & Testing: 90% and 10% of the total dataset, respectively, were used for both models. CLASSIFICATION: two 1-D convolutional neural networks were implemented, two classes were considered for first models (STEMI/Not-STEMI) and three classes for the second model (Anterior/Inferior/Lateral) each corresponding to the heart wall affected. These individual probabilities were aggregated to generate the final label for each model. RESULTS: The single‑lead ECG strategy was able to provide an accuracy of 90.5% for STEMI detection with Lead V2, which also yielded the best results overall among individual leads. STEMI Localization model provided promising results for anterior and inferior wall STEMIs but remained suboptimal for Lateral STEMI. CONCLUSIONS: An Artificial Intelligence-enhanced single‑lead ECG is a promising screening tool. This technology provides an autonomous and accurate STEMI diagnostic alternative that can be incorporated into wearable devices, potentially providing patients reliable means to seek treatment early and offers the potential to thereby improve STEMI outcomes in the long run.
BACKGROUND: While ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI) door-to-balloon times are often below 90 min, symptom to door times remain long at 2.5-h, due at least in part to a delay in diagnosis. OBJECTIVES: To develop and validate a machine learning-guided algorithm which uses a single‑lead electrocardiogram (ECG) for STEMI detection to speed diagnosis. METHODS: Data was extracted from the Latin America Telemedicine Infarct Network (LATIN), a population-based Acute Myocardial Infarction (AMI) program that provides care to patients in Brazil, Colombia, Mexico, and Argentina through telemedicine. SAMPLE: the first dataset was comprised of 8511 ECGs that were used for various machine learning experiments to test our Deep Learning approach for STEMI diagnosis. The second dataset of 2542 confirmed STEMI diagnosis EKG records, including specific ischemic heart wall information (anterior, inferior, and lateral), was derived from the previous dataset to test the STEMI localization model. Preprocessing: Detection of QRS complexes by wavelet system, segmentation of each EKG record into individual heartbeats with fixed window of 0.4 s to the left and 0.9 s to the right of main. Training & Testing: 90% and 10% of the total dataset, respectively, were used for both models. CLASSIFICATION: two 1-D convolutional neural networks were implemented, two classes were considered for first models (STEMI/Not-STEMI) and three classes for the second model (Anterior/Inferior/Lateral) each corresponding to the heart wall affected. These individual probabilities were aggregated to generate the final label for each model. RESULTS: The single‑lead ECG strategy was able to provide an accuracy of 90.5% for STEMI detection with Lead V2, which also yielded the best results overall among individual leads. STEMI Localization model provided promising results for anterior and inferior wall STEMIs but remained suboptimal for Lateral STEMI. CONCLUSIONS: An Artificial Intelligence-enhanced single‑lead ECG is a promising screening tool. This technology provides an autonomous and accurate STEMI diagnostic alternative that can be incorporated into wearable devices, potentially providing patients reliable means to seek treatment early and offers the potential to thereby improve STEMI outcomes in the long run.
Authors: Amir Faour; Reece Pahn; Callum Cherrett; Oliver Gibbs; Karen Lintern; Christian J Mussap; Rohan Rajaratnam; Dominic Y Leung; David A Taylor; Steven C Faddy; Sidney Lo; Craig P Juergens; John K French Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2022-06-29 Impact factor: 6.106
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
Authors: Amir Faour; Callum Cherrett; Oliver Gibbs; Karen Lintern; Christian J Mussap; Rohan Rajaratnam; Dominic Y Leung; David A Taylor; Steve C Faddy; Sidney Lo; Craig P Juergens; John K French Journal: Catheter Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2022-06-29 Impact factor: 2.585