| Literature DB >> 36236504 |
Ding Han1,2, Guozheng Yan1,2, Lichao Wang1,2, Fangfang Hua1,2, Lin Yan3.
Abstract
Monitoring bodily pressure could provide valuable medical information for both doctors and patients. Long-term implantation of in vivo sensors is highly desirable in situations where perception reconstruction is needed. In particular, for fecal incontinence, artificial anal sphincters without perceptions could not remind patients when to defecate and even cause ischemic tissue necrosis due to uncontrolled clamping pressure. To address these issues, a novel self-packaging strain gauge sensor system is designed for in vivo perception reconstruction. In addition, long short-term memory (LSTM) networks, which show excellent performance in processing time series-related features and fitting properties, are used in this article to improve the prediction accuracy of the perception model. The proposed system has been tested and compared with the traditional linear regression (LR) approach using data from in vitro experiments. The results show that the Root-Mean-Square Error (RMSE) is reduced by more than 69%, which demonstrates that the prediction accuracy of the proposed LSTM model is higher than that of the LR model to reach a more accurate prediction of the amount of intestinal content. Furthermore, outcomes of in vivo experiments show that the robustness of the novel sensor system based on long short-term memory networks is verified through experiments with limited data.Entities:
Keywords: LSTM; artificial anal sphincter; fecal incontinence; perception reconstruction; strain gauge sensor
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36236504 PMCID: PMC9573014 DOI: 10.3390/s22197407
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.847
Figure 1Self-packaging pressure sensor (a) and Wheatstone bridge (b).
Figure 2Schematic diagram of AAS system with sensor system (a) and work principle (b).
Figure 3Internal structure of LSTM model.
Figure 4Defecation perception solution based on LSTM.
Eight-channel strain gauge sensor layout.
| Name | No. | Location |
|---|---|---|
| Sensor 1 | p1 | Upper arm, radial 1 |
| Sensor 2 | p2 | Upper arm, axial 1 |
| Sensor 3 | p3 | Upper arm, radial 2 |
| Sensor 4 | p4 | Upper arm, axial 2 |
| Sensor 5 | p5 | Middle arm, radial 1 |
| Sensor 6 | p6 | Middle arm, axial 1 |
| Sensor 7 | p7 | Middle arm, radial 2 |
| Sensor 8 | p8 | Middle arm, axial 2 |
Some of the data after convenience perception model preprocessing.
|
| P1 | P2 | P3 | P4 | P5 | P6 | P7 | P8 |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.000 | 0.059 | 0.025 | 0.115 | 0.013 | 0.067 | 0.084 | 0.135 | 0.110 | 1.0 | 0.000 |
| 0.000 | 0.053 | 0.006 | 0.093 | 0.013 | 0.118 | 0.148 | 0.187 | 0.137 | 0.0 | 0.150 |
| 0.150 | 0.099 | 0.054 | 0.117 | 0.073 | 0.205 | 0.228 | 0.257 | 0.195 | 0.0 | 0.250 |
| 0.250 | 0.226 | 0.184 | 0.197 | 0.203 | 0.353 | 0.355 | 0.375 | 0.316 | 0.0 | 0.400 |
| …… | …… | …… | …… | …… | …… | …… | …… | …… | …… | …… |
| 0.700 | 0.778 | 0.738 | 0.724 | 0.713 | 0.823 | 0.818 | 0.815 | 0.803 | 0.0 | 0.850 |
| 0.850 | 0.999 | 0.937 | 0.999 | 0.890 | 0.999 | 1.000 | 0.996 | 0.999 | 0.0 | 1.000 |
Figure 5Implantation surgery of AAS with proposed sensor system (a) and in vivo experiments observation (b).
Figure 6Prediction performance of LR model.
Figure 7Loss comparison between testing and training dataset of LSTM model.
Figure 8Prediction performance of LSTM model.
Figure 9Defecation prediction in vivo experiment based on proposed LSTM model.