| Literature DB >> 35430598 |
Bao-Hong Mi1,2, Wen-Zheng Zhang3, Yong-Hua Xiao3, Wen-Xue Hong4, Jia-Lin Song4, Jian-Feng Tu1,2, Bi-Yao Jiang3, Chen Ye3, Guang-Xia Shi5,6.
Abstract
Metabolic syndrome (MS) is a clinical syndrome with multiple metabolic disorders. As the diagnostic criteria for MS still lacking of imaging laboratory method, this study aimed to explore the differences between healthy people and MS patients through infrared thermography (IRT). However, the observation region of the IRT image is uncertain, and the research tried to solve this problem with the help of knowledge mining technology. 43 MS participants were randomly included through a cross-sectional method, and 43 healthy participants were recruited through number matching. The IRT image of each participant was segmented into the region of interest (ROI) through the preprocessing method proposed in this research, and then the ROI features were granulated by the K-means algorithm to generate the formal background, and finally, the two formal background were separately built into a knowledge graph through the knowledge mining method based on the attribute partial order structure. The baseline data shows that there is no difference in age, gender, and height between the two groups (P > 0.05). The image preprocessing method can segment the IRT image into 18 ROI. Through the K-means method, each group of data can be separately established with a 43 × 36 formal background and generated a knowledge graph. It can be found through knowledge mining and independent-samples T test that the average temperature and maximum temperature difference between the chest and face of the two groups are statistically different (P < 0.01). IRT could reflect the difference between healthy people and MS people. The measurement regions were found by the method of knowledge mining on the premise of unknown. The method proposed in this paper may add a new imaging method for MS laboratory examinations, and at the same time, through knowledge mining, it can also expand a new idea for clinical research of IRT.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35430598 PMCID: PMC9012989 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-10422-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.996
Figure 1The design of this study.
Figure 2Flow chart of bimodal background filtering method.
Figure 3The region segmentation target.
A comparison table of Purhor information and body surface marks.
| Pur_1 | Pur _2 | Pur_3 | Pur_4 | Pur_5 | Pur_6 | Pur_7 | Pur_8 | Pur_9 | Pur_10 | Pur_11 | Pur_12 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Right wrist | Medial right elbow | Right armpit | Right shoulder | Left wrist | Medial left elbow | Left armpit | Left shoulder | Forehead | Chin | Belly-button | Crotch |
The relationship between theROI labels and the Purhor points.
| Labels | Body parts | Purhors |
|---|---|---|
| ROI1 | Right palm | Pur_1 |
| ROI2 | Right forearm | Pur_1, Pur_2 |
| ROI3 | Right anterior elbow | Pur_2 |
| ROI4 | Right upper arm | Pur_2, Pur_3, Pur_4 |
| ROI5 | Left palm | Pur_5 |
| ROI6 | Left forearm | Pur_5, Pur_6 |
| ROI7 | Leftt anterior elbow | Pur_6 |
| ROI8 | Left upper arm | Pur_6, Pur_7, Pur_8 |
| ROI9 | Right face | Pur_9, Pur_10 |
| ROI10 | Left face | Pur_9, Pur_10 |
| ROI11 | Right clavicle fossa | Pur_4, Pur_8, Pur_10 |
| ROI12 | Left clavicle fossa | Pur_4, Pur_8, Pur_10 |
| ROI13 | Right chest | Pur_3, Pur_4, Pur_7, Pur_8, Pur_11 |
| ROI14 | Left chest | Pur_3, Pur_4, Pur_7, Pur_8, Pur_11 |
| ROI15 | Right upper abdomen | Pur_4, Pur_8, Pur_11 |
| ROI16 | Left upper abdomen | Pur_4, Pur_8, Pur_11 |
| ROI17 | Right lower abdomen | Pur_11, Pur_12 |
| ROI18 | Left lower abdomen | Pur_11, Pur_12 |
Figure 4Flow chart of data granulation.
Participant demographic and baseline characteristics.
| Characteristic | MS group (N = 43) | Control group (N = 43) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, mean ± SD, years | 38.95 (7.074) | 37.70 (9.498) | 0.489 |
| Female, no(%) | 21 (48.84) | 20 (46.51) | 0.832 |
| Height, mean (SD), cm | 169.85 (8.67) | 168.46 (6.89) | 0.411 |
| Female | 165.99 (8.15) | 163.51 (4.87) | 0.248 |
| Male | 173.55 (7.60) | 172.76 (5.34) | 0.690 |
| Weight, mean (SD), kg | 81.70 (14.98) | 62.33 (7.88) | ≤ 0.001** |
| Female | 75.24 (16.34) | 56.62 (6.04) | ≤ 0.001** |
| Male | 87.87 (10.63) | 67.31 (5.60) | ≤ 0.001** |
| BMI, mean (SD), kg/m2 | 28.19 (4.12) | 21.94 (2.22) | ≤ 0.001** |
| Waistline,mean (SD), cm | 96.87 (9.31) | 75.60 (7.10) | ≤ 0.001** |
| SBP, mean (SD), mm·Hg | 131.84 (18.24) | 112.98 (8.81) | ≤ 0.001** |
| DBP,mean (SD), mm·Hg | 83.19 (14.55) | 70.26 (6.89) | ≤ 0.001** |
| TG,mean (SD), mmol/L | 2.69 (1.74) | 0.96 (0.27) | ≤ 0.001** |
| FBG, mean (SD), mmol/L | 7.36 (2.84) | 5.14 (0.28) | ≤ 0.001** |
| HDL-C,mean (SD), mmol/L | 1.10 (0.27) | 1.45 (0.24) | ≤ 0.001** |
BMI Body Mass Index (calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared), SBP systolic blood pressure, DBP diastolic blood pressure, TG triglyceride, FBG fasting blood glucose, HDL-C high density liptein cholesterol.
**Significant difference.
Figure 5ROI segmentation results of the IRT data.
Figure 6APOS diagram of IRT characteristics of control group.
Figure 7APOS diagram of IRT characteristics of MS group.
Figure 8Distribution map of temperature difference between face and chest.
The result of independent-samples T test.
| Temperature difference | t | df | Sig. (2-tailed) | Mean difference | Std.Error Difference | 95% Confidence interval of the difference | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lower | Upper | ||||||
| △Tavg | 8.235 | 83.4 | ≤ 0.001** | 2.74 | 0.33 | 2.08 | 3.40 |
| △Tmax | 4.299 | 84 | ≤ 0.001** | 1.19 | 0.28 | 0.64 | 1.75 |
| △Tmin | 0.589 | 83.889 | 0.588 | 0.37 | 0.63 | -0.89 | 1.63 |
**Significant difference.