| Literature DB >> 35252442 |
Haixia Li1, Guojun Zhang2, Guicheng Shao1, Aizhen Wang1, Yarong Gu1, Zhumei Tian1, Qiong Zhang1, Pengcheng Shi2.
Abstract
Most researchers use features of diastolic murmurs to identify coronary artery disease. However, the diastolic murmurs of coronary artery disease are usually very weak and are easily contaminated by noise and valvular murmurs. Therefore, the diagnostic accuracy of coronary artery disease when only using diastolic murmurs is not well. An algorithm for improving the accuracy in the identification of coronary artery disease by combining the features of the first heart sound and diastolic murmurs was proposed. Firstly, a first heart sound feature extraction algorithm was used to identify coronary artery disease from noncoronary artery disease. Secondly, the Empirical Wavelet Transform algorithm was used to decompose the diastolic heart sound into three modes, and the spectral energy of each mode was calculated to distinguish coronary artery disease from noncoronary artery disease. Then, the features of the fist heart sound, the second diastolic spectral energy, and the parameter P3, which was used to discriminate the diastolic murmurs in coronary artery disease and in valvular disease, were combined together to improve the diagnostic accuracy of coronary artery disease. The comparison experiment results show that the accuracy of the proposed algorithm is superior to some state-of-the-art methods when they are used to diagnose coronary artery disease.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35252442 PMCID: PMC8890861 DOI: 10.1155/2022/3058835
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Figure 1Trend of mortality of CAD in urban and rural areas from 2002 to 2016.
Figure 2The diagram of the proposed algorithm.
Figure 3The MEMS electronic stethoscope. (a) The installation of the stethoscope. (b) The appearance of the stethoscope.
Figure 4The segmentations of different S1's Fourier spectrum. (a) Normal S1; (b) S1 of mitral stenosis; (c) S1 split; (d) S1 of CAD.
Figure 5Mode decomposition of different S1. (a) Normal S1; (b) S1 with mitral stenosis; (c) abnormal S1 split; (d) S1 of CAD.
Figure 6Distribution of IF of different S1 after using clustering algorithm. (a) Normal S1; (b) S1 with mitral stenosis; (c) abnormal S1 split; (d) S1 of CAD.
Figure 7Diastolic spectrum segmentation. (a) CAD's diastolic spectrum segmentation; (b) normal diastolic spectrum segmentation.
Figure 8Modal decomposition of two different diastolic heart sounds. (a) CAD's diastolic heart sounds; (b) normal diastolic heart sounds.
Figure 9Spectrum of diastolic modes. (a) Spectrum of CAD's diastolic modes; (b) spectrum of normal diastolic modes.
Comparison of characteristic values between CAD and normal subject.
| CAD | Normal subject | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No. |
|
|
| P1 | P2 |
|
|
| P1 | P2 |
| 1 | 0.0015 | 2.8 | 1.7 | 0.0018 | 1.1 | 3.4 | 2.2 | 1.8 | 6.4 | 5.4 |
| 2 | 3.8 | 1.1 | 8.9 | 0.0028 | 2.3 | 3.8 | 3.4 | 3.4 | 8.8 | 8.8 |
| 3 | 7.7 | 1.9 | 1.5 | 0.0025 | 2.0 | 9.8 | 1.6 | 6.9 | 1.6 | 7.0 |
| 4 | 0.0015 | 1.9 | 2.4 | 0.0013 | 1.6 | 0.0014 | 2.1 | 1.8 | 1.5 | 1.3 |
| 5 | 6.2 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 0.0024 | 1.7 | 0.0017 | 1.0 | 7.8 | 6.0 | 4.5 |
| 6 | 4.0 | 1.1 | 8.4 | 0.0029 | 2.1 | 0.0013 | 1.6 | 1.7 | 1.2 | 1.3 |
|
| 8.6 | 1.7 | 1.4 | 0.0023 | 1.8 | 0.0010 | 2.0 | 1.7 | 3.4 | 3.0 |
|
| 2.2 | 3 | 3 | 3.1 | 1.5 | 2.6 | 5.6 | 8.0 | 9.6 | 9.5 |
The relationship between heart sound characteristics and CAD or non-CAD.
| No. | Source | Recordings |
|
| M1 (Hz) | T1 (Hz) | P3 | Is it CAD? | Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | SCDB | 40 cardiac cycles | 4.80 | 3.49 | 28 | 6 | 19.3 | Yes | 50% coronary blockage |
| 2 | SCDB | 40 cardiac cycles | 5.23 | 3.56 | 19 | 4 | 25.14 | Yes | 60% coronary blockage |
| 3 | MHSDB | 40 cardiac cycles | 2.2 | 1.8 | 39 | 10 | 16.19 | No | Normal |
| 4 | SCDB | 40 cardiac cycles | 2.43 | 1.45 | 22 | 8 | 10.17 | Yes | 90% coronary blockage |
| 5 | SCDB | 40 cardiac cycles | 3.58 | 1.90 | 27 | 6 | 62.46 | Yes | Multiple coronary blockages |
| 6 | SCDB | 40 cardiac cycles | 1.29 | 5.93 | 23 | 4 | 8.96 | Yes | 50% coronary blockage |
| 7 | SCDB | 40 cardiac cycles | 1.58 | 6.33 | 46 | 6 | 9.98 | Yes | 90% coronary blockage |
| 8 | MHSDB | 40 cardiac cycles | 2.23 | 9.89 | 47 | 22 | 7.38 | No | Mitral stenosis |
| 9 | MHSDB | 40 cardiac cycles | 0 | 0 | 51 | 13 | 0.92 | No | Late diastolic valve murmurs |
| 10 | SCDB | 40 cardiac cycles | 3.42 | 1.77 | 18 | 4 | 48.16 | Yes | Multiple coronary blockages |
| 11 | MHSDB | 40 cardiac cycles | 3.66 | 4.63 | 21 | 7 | 0.86 | No | Early and late valve diastolic murmurs |
| 12 | SCDB | 40 cardiac cycles | 1.45 | 5.76 | 60 | 21 | 1.35 | No | Normal |
Comparison of the performance of different method in identification of CAD and non-CAD.
| Different methods | Total subjects | TP | FN | FP | Se (%) | Pp (%) | Oa (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HHT | 100 | 50 | 10 | 31 | 83.3 | 61.7 | 54.9 |
| Wavelet analysis | 100 | 48 | 12 | 28 | 80 | 63.1 | 54.5 |
| Eigenvector method | 100 | 51 | 9 | 26 | 85 | 66.2 | 59.3 |
| AR model | 100 | 49 | 11 | 33 | 81.2 | 59.8 | 52.7 |
| ARMA | 100 | 47 | 13 | 35 | 78.3 | 57.3 | 49.5 |
| Proposed method | 100 | 55 | 5 | 4 | 91.2 | 93.2 | 85.9 |