| Literature DB >> 35402367 |
Gabriel Fernando Todeschi Variane1,2,3, João Paulo Vasques Camargo2,4, Daniela Pereira Rodrigues2,5, Maurício Magalhães1,2,6, Marcelo Jenné Mimica7,8.
Abstract
Neonatology has experienced a significant reduction in mortality rates of the preterm population and critically ill infants over the last few decades. Now, the emphasis is directed toward improving long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes and quality of life. Brain-focused care has emerged as a necessity. The creation of neonatal neurocritical care units, or Neuro-NICUs, provides strategies to reduce brain injury using standardized clinical protocols, methodologies, and provider education and training. Bedside neuromonitoring has dramatically improved our ability to provide assessment of newborns at high risk. Non-invasive tools, such as continuous electroencephalography (cEEG), amplitude-integrated electroencephalography (aEEG), and near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS), allow screening for seizures and continuous evaluation of brain function and cerebral oxygenation at the bedside. Extended and combined uses of these techniques, also described as multimodal monitoring, may allow practitioners to better understand the physiology of critically ill neonates. Furthermore, the rapid growth of technology in the Neuro-NICU, along with the increasing use of telemedicine and artificial intelligence with improved data mining techniques and machine learning (ML), has the potential to vastly improve decision-making processes and positively impact outcomes. This article will cover the current applications of neuromonitoring in the Neuro-NICU, recent advances, potential pitfalls, and future perspectives in this field.Entities:
Keywords: amplitude-integrated electroencephalography; artificial intelligence; machine learning; multimodal monitoring; near-infrared spectroscopy; telemedicine
Year: 2022 PMID: 35402367 PMCID: PMC8984110 DOI: 10.3389/fped.2021.755144
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Pediatr ISSN: 2296-2360 Impact factor: 3.418
Figure 1An example of seizures displayed on two-channel aEEG and raw EEG. Figure from the authors' personal file.
Neuro-NICU eligibility and recommended neuromonitoring [adapted from Van Meurs et al. (20)].
|
|
|
|---|---|
| 1. HIE/cooling | aEEG, cEEG |
| 2. Seizures | aEEG and cEEG |
| 3. ECMO/pre-ECMO | NIRS and consider aEEG |
| 4. Grade III/IV IVH or PHVD | aEEG |
| 5. Critical/unstable | NIRS and consider aEEG |
| 6. Preterms <28 weeks | aEEG and NIRS |
| 7. CNS anomalies cEEG | cEEG and/or aEEG |
| 8. Metabolic disease | cEEG and/or aEEG |
| 9. Cyanotic CHD | NIRS |
| 10. CNS infection | cEEG and/or aEEG |
| 11. Symptomatic PDA | NIRS |
| 12. ALTE/BRUE | aEEG |
| 13. Hyperbilirubinemia > 20 or hemolytic process | NIRS and consider aEEG |
ALTE, apparent life-threatening event; BRUE, brief resolved unexplained events; CNS, central nervous system; ECMO, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation; PDA, patent ductus arteriosus.
Figure 2(A) Example of a multimodal approach combining aEEG, NIRS, pulse oximetry, heart rate, and temperature findings in real-time. During the seizure episode noted on aEEG (arrow), a decrease in rScO2 was observed together with significant fluctuations in pulse oximetry and heart rate. Figure from the authors' personal file. (B) Example of a multimodal approach combining aEEG, NIRS, pulse oximetry, heart rate findings in real-time in proprietary software developed using a specific programming language (Python). Correlation between aEEG (continuous low voltage pattern) and low rScO2 is observed. Figure from the authors' personal file.
Figure 3Overview of data collection and integration for multimodal monitoring in the NICU. Data from vital signs, EEG/aEEG, and NIRS devices can be integrated into a central hub. This data can be used for machine learning algorithms using continuous monitoring data.
Figure 4Machine learning pipeline: (1) Data preparation is the step where modifications to the dataset are made to improve the final results. That includes transforming, cleaning, and creating new features (feature engineering). In this step, the train-test data splitting can also be defined. (2) Model selection is the step where the appropriate model is chosen. That can significantly vary according to the dataset characteristics (like size and dimensionality) and the target variable. (3) Model configuration is the step in which all the parameters of the model must be set. (4) Model training is the step in which the machine finds the best-fitting predictive model according to the train dataset and model parameters. (5) Model evaluation is the step in which the user will analyze the results, mainly the train and test error of the generated predictive model.
List of studies using ML for automated seizure detection published in the last 5 years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ansari et al. ( | To describe a multi-stage classifier method for enhancing an automated EEG-based neonatal seizure detector. | 71 Term Neonates with HIE or suspicion of seizures | EEG-polygraphy data | - The proposed post-processor (when sensitivity threshold = 0.3) decreased FAR by 64%, whereas the GDR was reduced by 7%. | A significant improvement of a previously developed automated neonatal seizure detector was achieved by combining a machine learning technique with the heuristic algorithm. |
| - Identifying seizures lasting less than 30 s remains the most challenging task of the post-processor since it includes 26% of true and 60% of false detections. | |||||
| Ansari et al. ( | To improve the overall performance of a previously developed multi-stage neonatal seizure detector, particularly by improving the performance of the short seizure detections. | 48 Neonates with HIE | EEG-polygraphy data | - Almost all seizures longer than 1min were detected by both methods, while the short seizures are still not entirely detected. | An adaptive learning method was proposed to decrease the false alarm rate and increase the positive predictive value of a previously developed multi-stage neonatal seizure detector, particularly for very short seizures and false alarms. |
| - The number of false detections of very short seizures (<30 s) decreased by 50% | |||||
| - The PPV of very short seizures also increased from 41 to 59% by the proposed method (higher reliability of the alarms). | |||||
| Ansari et al. ( | To use deep CNNs and random forest to optimize feature selection and classification automatically. | 48 Neonates | EEG recordings | - AUC of the CNN and RF method is 8% higher than the pure CNN with the fully connected network (83 vs. 75%). | The main advantage of the proposed method is that it does not require a hand-engineered feature extraction process. Still, it automatically extracts the required features and optimizes them based on the training data. |
| - CNN's specificity was 5% lower, while the averaged false alarm rate per hour is 0.04 better than those of the heuristic methods. | |||||
| Bogaarts et al. ( | To gain insight into optimal training set composition for age-independent seizure detection and compare classification performance, specific properties of the classifiers themselves. | 39 Neonates with post-conception age ranging from 28 to 59 weeks / 39 adults | EEG recordings | - With FBC, the amount of neonatal SVs increased to 55%. | Adult and newborn patients can both benefit from an age-independent SVM seizure detection system. However, it is critical that EEG data from each age group be utilized for training the classifier. |
| - For newborn seizures detection, the classifier trained only on adult EEG data performed considerably worse than the classifier trained on neonatal EEG data or the one trained on both neonatal and adult EEG data. | |||||
| Mathieson et al. ( | To describe a novel neurophysiology-based performance analysis of automated seizure detection algorithms for neonatal EEG to characterize the features of detected and undetected seizures and the causes of false detections to identify areas for algorithmic improvement. | 20 Term neonates | EEG recordings and ANSeR SDA | −421 seizures were initially detected in a total of 1,262.9 h of EEG (mean 63.1). | The analysis presented has elucidated several aspects of the performance of the SDA from a neurophysiological perspective. The analysis of the ANSeR algorithm highlighted many areas for possible improvement, which have since resulted in increased performance in the ANSeR algorithm's beta version. |
| - Clinical neurophysiologists confirmed seizures in 419 of the 421 events annotated by experienced electroencephalographers (99.76%). | |||||
| - More seizures were detected at lower thresholds (higher sensitivity), but the false detection rate is also higher. | |||||
| - False detection rates between seizure and non-seizure neonates were not statistically different at any of the three thresholds tested (threshold 0.4, | |||||
| - For all three thresholds tested, 8/10 of the seizure features were a significant predictor of automated seizure detection. | |||||
| - The AUCs (95% CI) for the multivariate model at all 3 ANSeR sensitivity thresholds was significantly better (threshold 0.4 | |||||
| Mathieson et al. ( | To validate the performance of the neonatal SDA on a more extensive database of unseen, unedited, continuous, multi-channel EEG data from 70 term newborns collected at two sites | 70 Term neonates | EEG recordings and SDA | - There is variability in seizure detection and false detection rates across babies. | The potential of the SDA to support clinical decisions regarding AED administration was shown in this study. The study has validated a neonatal SDA on a large EEG dataset and demonstrated that it achieves a clinically useful level of seizure detection with acceptable false detection rates. |
| - The highest performing threshold varies depending on the parameter of interest. | |||||
| - There is a trade-off between the number of seizure and non-seizure babies detected depending on the SDA sensitivity threshold. | |||||
| - The best performing SDA sensitivity threshold was at 0.8 (30/35 seizure babies identified, 31/35 non-seizure babies identified). | |||||
| - The maximal level of agreement was at a sensitivity threshold of 0.4. | |||||
| - The median AUC for the validation study, estimated on neonates with seizures, was 0.945. The mean AUC was 0.933. | |||||
| Mathieson et al. ( | To evaluate the morphology of seizures in newborns before and after phenobarbital treatment and assess the influence of any variations on automated seizure detection rates. | 18 Term neonates | EEG recordings | - No significant differences between groups were found in seizure duration, rhythmicity, frequency variability (over the whole seizure), background EEG grade, seizure waveform morphology at the start or peak of the seizure, or seizure waveform morphology change from start to a peak of a seizure. | Phenobarbital reduces the amplitude and propagation of seizures, but ANSeR performance is unaffected by these changes. |
| - The seizure detection rates (sensitivity threshold 0.3) were not significantly different, with a median detection rate of 77% for pre-phenobarbital seizures and a 73% detection rate for post-phenobarbital seizures. | |||||
| Temko et al. ( | To propose a probabilistic framework for semi-supervised adaptation of a generic patient-independent neonatal seizure detector. | 18 Full-term neonates | Continuous neonatal EEG recordings | The Oracle patient-dependent system's performance, patient-dependent PD-GMM is 97.51 and 86.33% for AUC and AUC90, respectively. | A combination of patient adaptive generative and patient independent discriminative classifiers has improved the detection of neonatal seizures throughout long EEG recordings. More accurate detection comes from the different nature of the classification approaches and the real-time incorporation of patient-specific data. |
| - The patient adaptive GMM system (PA-GMM) provides a performance that improves over its patient-independent GMM counterpart (PI-GMM) _ 96.91 vs. 95.70% for AUC, and 82.6 vs. 78.4% for AUC90. | |||||
| Tapani et al. ( | To estimate several features based on the SNLEO and use machine learning to optimize the SC method. | 79 Term neonates with multiple etiologies. | Continuous multi-channel EEG recordings | - SNLEO features alone resulted in a median AUC of 0.963 (IQR 0.919–0.985), significantly higher than the original SVM-based method ( | By using SNLEO features adapted from the SC technique, the performance of an SVM-based neonatal EEG seizure detector is significantly improved. |
| - The SNLEO method was significantly improved by incorporating a selected number of features from the SVM-based detector ( | |||||
| Tapani et al. ( | To develop methods for detecting the non-stationary periodic characteristics of EEG seizures by adapting estimates of the correlation both in the time SC and time-frequency domain TFC. | 79 Term neonates. | EEG recordings | - The proposed measures were very discriminative in detecting seizures (median AUCSC: 0.933). | The suggested SDA surpasses their implementation of leading techniques across all concatenated EEG recordings. There is still room for the development of features for neonatal SDAs, emphasizing time-varying methods. |
| - When applied to multi-channel recordings, the resulting SDA achieved a median AUC of 0.988 compared to consensus annotations, outperformed two state-of-the-art SDAs ( | |||||
| Stevenson et al. ( | To combine two recently developed NSDAs, including the hybrid algorithm combining the feature with the output of the CNN using a kernel SVM, for improvement of detection performance. | 79 Neonates | EEG recordings | - Increasing the minimum seizure duration from 10 to 30 s provides the most significant increase in performance with the highest SDR and lowest FD/h. | Automated approaches for detecting newborn EEG seizures are accurate, possibly offering physicians in the NICU with reliable interpretations. |
| - The area under the receiver operator characteristic of the NSDA was 0.952 compared to the expert consensus annotation (95% CI: 0.0927–0.971). | |||||
| - The inter-observer agreement (IOA) of seizure identification was not significantly different between the NSDA and human analysis and was further improved by increasing the minimum seizure length from 10 s to 30 s. | |||||
| Pavel et al. ( | To study the ANSeR algorithm's real-time performance in a multi-center study by comparing diagnostic accuracy to identify electrographic seizures with and without the use of ANSeR as a bedside support tool for clinicians. | 258 Neonates between the correct gestational age of 36 and 44 weeks | EEG recordings and ANSeR | - The primary outcome measure of diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity, specificity, and false detection rate) was not statistically different between the two groups for detecting an infant with seizures. | Although all participating hospitals were experienced in neonatal EEG and the clinical teams were generally comfortable interpreting the aEEG or cEEG, the support provided by the ANSeR algorithm still had a considerable effect on the seizure recognition rate. The study suggests that the benefit provided by the ANSeR algorithm might be more significant if it was made available to centers with less experience of interpreting neonatal EEG at the cot side. |
| - The percentage of seizure hours identified was higher in the algorithm group (177 [66.0%; 95% CI 53.8–77.3] vs. 177 [45.3%; 34.5–58.3]; difference 20·8% [3.6–37.1]). | |||||
| - The false detection rate on the seizure record form did not differ between the groups. | |||||
| - No significant differences were found between the groups regarding the secondary outcomes of seizure characteristics (total seizure burden, maximum hourly seizure burden, and median seizure duration) and the percentage of neonates with seizures given at least one inappropriate antiseizure medication. |
FAR, false alarm rate; GDR, good detection rate; PPV, positive predictive value; CNN, convolutional neural networks; RF, random forest; FBC, feature baseline correction; SVs, support vector; SVM, support vector machine; ANSeR, algorithm for neonatal seizure recognition; SDA, seizure detection algorithm; AUC, area under the curve; AED, antiepileptic drug; GMM, Gaussian mixture model; SNLEO, smoothed non-linear energy operator; SC, spike correlation; TFC, time-frequency correlation; NSDAs, neonatal EEG seizure detection algorithms; SDR, seizure detection rate; FD/h, false detections per hour.
Figure 5Model of architecture for multimodal monitoring accessed by telemedicine approach. Vital signs, EEG/aEEG, and NIRS are integrated using a central hub. The encrypted data is transferred to the cloud system and accessed by a monitoring center or remote assistance.