Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

Validation of an artificial intelligence system for holter ECG analysis

View through CrossRef
Abstract Introduction Holter ECG is a commonly used tool to identify heart rhythm disorders. As physician-based analysis of such Holter ECG is time consuming, various approaches using computerized interpretation have been developed. However, accuracy of these tools remains inferior to physician-based analysis. Thus, this study assesses the diagnostic performance of an artificial intelligence (AI)-powered Holter ECG service in comparison to results from reference databases as well as with physician-based evaluation. Methods 231 ECG recordings, covering 2,261 hours of ECG with annotations for 10,024,315 heartbeats from the following reference databases were used: MIT-BIH Arrhythmia (MITDB), American Heart Association ECG (AHDB), MIT-BIH Atrial Fibrillation (AFDB), Long Term Atrial Fibrillation (LTAFDB). Those recordings were originally collected from a mixed population of inpatients and outpatients between 1975 and 2008. Analysis of these recordings regarding the detection of QRS complexes, QRS classification and detection of Atrial Fibrillation (AF) was performed using a novel service for AI-based ECG analysis. Results were compared to the diagnosis stated within the database. QRS complex detection accuracy was performed on recordings from MITDB and AHADB by checking if time positions are within 150 ms to reference annotations. The QRS classification in three classes (normal, supraventricular, ventricular) was then compared for each detected heartbeat. Mismatches were adjudicated manually by three experts. Episodes of Atrial Fibrillation were detected in recordings from MITDB, AFDB and LTAFDB and compared to the reference episodes from the databases. The accuracy was evaluated based on the overlap with the reference annotations in the time-domain. Results Sensitivity and Precision of heartbeat detection compared to the reference databases exceeded 99% Figure 1 displays the results of heartbeat classification. Normal heartbeats were classified with a sensitivity of 99.6%, precision of 99.9% and specificity of 99.6%. For ventricular heartbeats, a sensitivity of 99.58 %, precision of 99.88 and specificity of 99.99% were achieved. Premature supraventricular contractions were recognized with a sensitivity of 99.58 %, precision of 100% and specificity of 100%. When comparing the 248,187 QRS complex classifications of MITDB and AHADB to the AI-powered analysis, 128 discrepancies were revealed. 43 were due to a discrepancy of convention as these beats were in sections that were also marked as AF episodes by the databases and the AI-powered analysis marks all beats in AF episodes as normal. Of the 85 remaining discrepancies, more than 87% were adjudicated in favor of the AI-powered analysis by the experts. Figure 2 shows the comparison of AF detection results showing Sensitivity and Precision above 99%. Conclusion AI-powered Holter ECG analysis compared to reference ECG stripes exceed 99% of sensitivity, specificity and precision.QRS complex detectionAF/ AFib detection
Title: Validation of an artificial intelligence system for holter ECG analysis
Description:
Abstract Introduction Holter ECG is a commonly used tool to identify heart rhythm disorders.
As physician-based analysis of such Holter ECG is time consuming, various approaches using computerized interpretation have been developed.
However, accuracy of these tools remains inferior to physician-based analysis.
Thus, this study assesses the diagnostic performance of an artificial intelligence (AI)-powered Holter ECG service in comparison to results from reference databases as well as with physician-based evaluation.
Methods 231 ECG recordings, covering 2,261 hours of ECG with annotations for 10,024,315 heartbeats from the following reference databases were used: MIT-BIH Arrhythmia (MITDB), American Heart Association ECG (AHDB), MIT-BIH Atrial Fibrillation (AFDB), Long Term Atrial Fibrillation (LTAFDB).
Those recordings were originally collected from a mixed population of inpatients and outpatients between 1975 and 2008.
Analysis of these recordings regarding the detection of QRS complexes, QRS classification and detection of Atrial Fibrillation (AF) was performed using a novel service for AI-based ECG analysis.
Results were compared to the diagnosis stated within the database.
QRS complex detection accuracy was performed on recordings from MITDB and AHADB by checking if time positions are within 150 ms to reference annotations.
The QRS classification in three classes (normal, supraventricular, ventricular) was then compared for each detected heartbeat.
Mismatches were adjudicated manually by three experts.
Episodes of Atrial Fibrillation were detected in recordings from MITDB, AFDB and LTAFDB and compared to the reference episodes from the databases.
The accuracy was evaluated based on the overlap with the reference annotations in the time-domain.
Results Sensitivity and Precision of heartbeat detection compared to the reference databases exceeded 99% Figure 1 displays the results of heartbeat classification.
Normal heartbeats were classified with a sensitivity of 99.
6%, precision of 99.
9% and specificity of 99.
6%.
For ventricular heartbeats, a sensitivity of 99.
58 %, precision of 99.
88 and specificity of 99.
99% were achieved.
Premature supraventricular contractions were recognized with a sensitivity of 99.
58 %, precision of 100% and specificity of 100%.
When comparing the 248,187 QRS complex classifications of MITDB and AHADB to the AI-powered analysis, 128 discrepancies were revealed.
43 were due to a discrepancy of convention as these beats were in sections that were also marked as AF episodes by the databases and the AI-powered analysis marks all beats in AF episodes as normal.
Of the 85 remaining discrepancies, more than 87% were adjudicated in favor of the AI-powered analysis by the experts.
Figure 2 shows the comparison of AF detection results showing Sensitivity and Precision above 99%.
Conclusion AI-powered Holter ECG analysis compared to reference ECG stripes exceed 99% of sensitivity, specificity and precision.
QRS complex detectionAF/ AFib detection.

Related Results

Inter-beat and intra-beat ECG interval analysis based on state space and hidden markov models
Inter-beat and intra-beat ECG interval analysis based on state space and hidden markov models
Analyse des intervalles ECG inter- et intra-battement sur des modèles d'espace d'état et de Markov cachés Les maladies cardiovasculaires sont l'une des principales ...
Self-Supervised Electrocardiograph De-noising
Self-Supervised Electrocardiograph De-noising
Abstract The electrocardiogram (ECG) records heart-beats and is potentially life-saving. However, the ECG signals (e.g., recorded by the standard ECG monitoring sys...
Development of AI-based method to detect the subtle ECG deviations from the population ECG norm
Development of AI-based method to detect the subtle ECG deviations from the population ECG norm
Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: Public grant(s) – National budget only. Main funding source(s): Natio...
QT interval duration at a stable heart rate of 60 bpm is a new assessment parameter for Holter monitoring
QT interval duration at a stable heart rate of 60 bpm is a new assessment parameter for Holter monitoring
The relevance of the study is due to the limitations in the calculation and evaluation of the corrected QT interval (QTc) in patients with Holter monitoring (Ho...
How Can We Identify the Best Implantation Site for an ECG Event Recorder?
How Can We Identify the Best Implantation Site for an ECG Event Recorder?
ZELLERHOFF, C., et al.: How Can We Identify the Best Implantation Site for an ECG Event Recorder? The aim of this study was to show how to find the preferable implantation site for...

Back to Top