| Literature DB >> 35590972 |
Taotao Liu1,2, Yujuan Si1,2, Weiyi Yang2,3, Jiaqi Huang4, Yongheng Yu1,2, Gengbo Zhang1,2, Rongrong Zhou1,2.
Abstract
An attack of congestive heart failure (CHF) can cause symptoms such as difficulty breathing, dizziness, or fatigue, which can be life-threatening in severe cases. An electrocardiogram (ECG) is a simple and economical method for diagnosing CHF. Due to the inherent complexity of ECGs and the subtle differences in the ECG waveform, misdiagnosis happens often. At present, the research on automatic CHF detection methods based on machine learning has become a research hotspot. However, the existing research focuses on an intra-patient experimental scheme and lacks the performance evaluation of working under noise, which cannot meet the application requirements. To solve the above issues, we propose a novel method to identify CHF using the ECG-Convolution-Vision Transformer Network (ECVT-Net). The algorithm combines the characteristics of a Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) and a Vision Transformer, which can automatically extract high-dimensional abstract features of ECGs with simple pre-processing. In this study, the model reached an accuracy of 98.88% for the inter-patient scheme. Furthermore, we added different degrees of noise to the original ECGs to verify the model's noise robustness. The model's performance in the above experiments proved that it could effectively identify CHF ECGs and can work under certain noise.Entities:
Keywords: Convolutional Neural Network (CNN); Vision Transformer; congestive heart failure (CHF); electrocardiogram (ECG); inter-patient scheme
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35590972 PMCID: PMC9104351 DOI: 10.3390/s22093283
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.847
Relevant research work on CHF detection.
| Author (Year) | Method | Database | Results |
|---|---|---|---|
| Orhan (2013) [ | EFiA-EWiT, and LR | CHF: BIDMC | Acc: 99.33% Se: 99.36% |
| Kamath (2015) [ | DFA | CHF: BIDMC | Acc: 98.20% Se: 98.40% |
| Sudarshan et al. (2017) [ | DTCWT, DT, and KNN | CHF: BIDMC | Acc: 99.86% Se: 99.78% |
| Acharya et al. (2019) [ | 11-layer deep CNN | CHF: BIDMC | Acc: 98.97% Se: 98.87% |
| Darmawahyuni et al. (2020) [ | LSTM | CHF: BIDMC | Acc: 99.86% Pr: 99.86% Se: 99.85% |
| Naik et al. (2021) [ | VGG16 | CHF: BIDMC | Acc: 100% |
Figure 1ECG waveforms from the BIDMC database and MITNSR database. (a) Normal heartbeat; (b) CHF heartbeat.
Details of databases.
| Database | ECG Type | Sampling Rates | ID | Individual (Sex, Age) | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MITNSR | Normal | 128 | 16265, 16272, 16273, 16420, 16483, 16539, 16773, 16786, 16795, 17052, 17453, 18177, 18184, 19088, 19090, 19093, 19140, 19830 | 5 men (aged 26~45), | 36,000 |
| BIDMC | CHF | 250 | chf01~chf15 | 11 men (aged 22~71), | 30,000 |
Figure 2Principles of inter-patient and intra-patient schemes. (a) Intra-patient scheme; (b) Inter-patient scheme.
Customized experimental implementation.
| Scheme | Category | Training Set | Test Set | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Patient ID | Number of | Patient ID | Number of | ||
| Intra-patient | Normal | Mixed | 32,400 | Mixed | 3600 |
| (Cross-validation) | CHF | Mixed | 27,000 | Mixed | 3000 |
| Inter-patient | Normal | 16265, 16272, 16273, 16420, 16483, 16539, 16773, 16786, 16795, 17052, | 20,000 | 17453, 18177, 18184, 19088, 19090, 19093, 19140, 19830 | 16,000 |
| CHF | chf01~chf08 | 16,000 | chf09~chf15 | 14,000 |
Figure 3Overall flow of the proposed method.
Figure 4Waveform of ECG during pre-processing. (a) Raw data (R points are given in the database); (b) Heartbeat segment; (c) Heartbeat after normalization.
Figure 5Pipeline of ECVT-Net for ECG feature extraction and classification.
Figure 6Impact of the structural parameters of ECVT-Net. (a) Number of convolutional kernels; (b) Length of the patch in the transition layer; (c) Number of Transformer blocks; (d) Number of attention heads; (e) Dimensions in each MLP’s hidden layer.
Detailed settings of ECVT-Net.
| Parameter | Value | Alternative List | Meaning |
|---|---|---|---|
| Batch size | 512 | (32, 64, …, 1024) | Quantity of heartbeats per batch |
| Epoch | 100 | (50, 100, 150) | Number of training iterations |
| Feature channel | 32 | (8, 16, 32, 64) | Number of convolutional kernels |
| Patch length | 25 | (5, 25) | Length of the patch in the transition layer |
| Depth | 6 | (4, 5, 6, 7, 8) | Number of Transformer blocks |
| Head | 8 | (6, 7, 8, 9, 10) | Number of attention heads |
| MLP dim | 2048 | (256, 512, 1024, 2048) | Dimensions in each MLP’s hidden layer |
| Learning rate | 0.001 | (0.1, 0.01, 0.001) | Learning rate of the optimizer |
Confusion matrix for the intra-patient experiment after ten-fold cross-validation.
| Original/Predicted | Normal | CHF | Pr (%) | Se (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 35,987 | 13 | 99.96 | 99.96 |
|
| 14 | 29,986 | 99.96 | 99.95 |
| Average (%) | 99.96 | 99.96 | ||
| Acc (%) | 99.96 | |||
Confusion matrix for the inter-patient experiment.
| Original/Predicted | Normal | CHF | Pr (%) | Se (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 15,694 | 306 | 99.82 | 98.09 |
|
| 29 | 13,971 | 97.86 | 99.79 |
| Average (%) | 98.84 | 98.94 | ||
| Acc (%) | 98.88 | |||
Figure 7The heartbeat waveforms at different SNRs. (a) SNR = ∞ dB (Raw data after pre-processing); (b) SNR = 24 dB; (c) SNR = 18 dB; (d) SNR = 12 dB; (e) SNR = 6 dB.
Model’s performance at different SNRs under inter-patient scheme.
| SNR (dB) | ACC (%) | Pr (%) | Se (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| ∞ | 98.88 | 98.84 | 98.94 |
| 24 | 98.60 | 98.56 | 98.64 |
| 18 | 97.99 | 97.98 | 97.99 |
| 12 | 94.69 | 95.04 | 94.45 |
| 6 | 87.97 | 89.99 | 87.24 |
Results of Ablation experiment under inter-patient scheme.
| Model | Acc (%) | Average | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pr (%) | Se (%) | ||
| CNN (1D Alex-Net) | 97.99 | 97.98 | 97.98 |
| ViT | 95.36 | 95.55 | 95.19 |
| Conv + ViT | 95.45 | 95.62 | 95.29 |
| Conv + BN + ViT | 98.32 | 98.29 | 98.35 |
| Conv + BN + ReLu + ViT | 98.19 | 98.17 | 98.20 |
| Conv + BN + ReLu + Pooling + ViT (ECVT-Net) | 98.88 | 98.84 | 98.94 |
Summary of the studies on CHF recognition using ECG data obtained from BIDMC and MITNSR database.
| Author | Method | Results | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intra-Patient | Inter-Patient | ||
| Orhan. [ | EFiA-EWiT, and LR | Acc: 99.33% Se: 99.36% | |
| Kamath. [ | DFA | Acc: 98.20% Se: 98.40% | |
| Darmawahyuni et al. [ | LSTM | Acc: 99.86% Pr: 99.86% | |
| Ours | ECVT-Net | Acc: 99.96% Pr: 99.96% | Acc: 98.88% Pr: 98.84% |