Noninvasive Fetal Electrocardiography Part II: Segmented-Beat Modulation Method for Signal Denoising.

Q3 Medicine
Open Biomedical Engineering Journal Pub Date : 2017-03-31 eCollection Date: 2017-01-01 DOI:10.2174/1874120701711010025
Angela Agostinelli, Agnese Sbrollini, Luca Burattini, Sandro Fioretti, Francesco Di Nardo, Laura Burattini
{"title":"Noninvasive Fetal Electrocardiography Part II: Segmented-Beat Modulation Method for Signal Denoising.","authors":"Angela Agostinelli,&nbsp;Agnese Sbrollini,&nbsp;Luca Burattini,&nbsp;Sandro Fioretti,&nbsp;Francesco Di Nardo,&nbsp;Laura Burattini","doi":"10.2174/1874120701711010025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Fetal well-being evaluation may be accomplished by monitoring cardiac activity through fetal electrocardiography. Direct fetal electrocardiography (acquired through scalp electrodes) is the gold standard but its invasiveness limits its clinical applicability. Instead, clinical use of indirect fetal electrocardiography (acquired through abdominal electrodes) is limited by its poor signal quality.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>Aim of this study was to evaluate the suitability of the Segmented-Beat Modulation Method to denoise indirect fetal electrocardiograms in order to achieve a signal-quality at least comparable to the direct ones.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Direct and indirect recordings, simultaneously acquired from 5 pregnant women during labor, were filtered with the Segmented-Beat Modulation Method and correlated in order to assess their morphological correspondence. Signal-to-noise ratio was used to quantify their quality.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Amplitude was higher in direct than indirect fetal electrocardiograms (median:104 µV <i>vs.</i> 22 µV; P=7.66·10<sup>-4</sup>), whereas noise was comparable (median:70 µV <i>vs.</i> 49 µV, P=0.45). Moreover, fetal electrocardiogram amplitude was significantly higher than affecting noise in direct recording (P=3.17·10<sup>-2</sup>) and significantly in indirect recording (P=1.90·10<sup>-3</sup>). Consequently, signal-to-noise ratio was initially higher for direct than indirect recordings (median:3.3 dB <i>vs.</i> -2.3 dB; P=3.90·10<sup>-3</sup>), but became lower after denoising of indirect ones (median:9.6 dB; P=9.84·10<sup>-4</sup>). Eventually, direct and indirect recordings were highly correlated (median: ρ=0.78; P<10<sup>-208</sup>), indicating that the two electrocardiograms were morphologically equivalent.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Segmented-Beat Modulation Method is particularly useful for denoising of indirect fetal electrocardiogram and may contribute to the spread of this noninvasive technique in the clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":39121,"journal":{"name":"Open Biomedical Engineering Journal","volume":"11 ","pages":"25-35"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2174/1874120701711010025","citationCount":"26","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open Biomedical Engineering Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2174/1874120701711010025","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2017/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 26

Abstract

Background: Fetal well-being evaluation may be accomplished by monitoring cardiac activity through fetal electrocardiography. Direct fetal electrocardiography (acquired through scalp electrodes) is the gold standard but its invasiveness limits its clinical applicability. Instead, clinical use of indirect fetal electrocardiography (acquired through abdominal electrodes) is limited by its poor signal quality.

Objective: Aim of this study was to evaluate the suitability of the Segmented-Beat Modulation Method to denoise indirect fetal electrocardiograms in order to achieve a signal-quality at least comparable to the direct ones.

Method: Direct and indirect recordings, simultaneously acquired from 5 pregnant women during labor, were filtered with the Segmented-Beat Modulation Method and correlated in order to assess their morphological correspondence. Signal-to-noise ratio was used to quantify their quality.

Results: Amplitude was higher in direct than indirect fetal electrocardiograms (median:104 µV vs. 22 µV; P=7.66·10-4), whereas noise was comparable (median:70 µV vs. 49 µV, P=0.45). Moreover, fetal electrocardiogram amplitude was significantly higher than affecting noise in direct recording (P=3.17·10-2) and significantly in indirect recording (P=1.90·10-3). Consequently, signal-to-noise ratio was initially higher for direct than indirect recordings (median:3.3 dB vs. -2.3 dB; P=3.90·10-3), but became lower after denoising of indirect ones (median:9.6 dB; P=9.84·10-4). Eventually, direct and indirect recordings were highly correlated (median: ρ=0.78; P<10-208), indicating that the two electrocardiograms were morphologically equivalent.

Conclusion: Segmented-Beat Modulation Method is particularly useful for denoising of indirect fetal electrocardiogram and may contribute to the spread of this noninvasive technique in the clinical practice.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

无创胎儿心电图第二部分:信号去噪的分段节拍调制方法。
背景:胎儿健康评估可以通过胎儿心电图监测心脏活动来完成。直接胎儿心电图(通过头皮电极获得)是金标准,但其侵入性限制了其临床适用性。相反,临床使用间接胎儿心电图(通过腹部电极获得)由于其信号质量差而受到限制。目的:评价分段心跳调制方法对间接胎儿心电图去噪的适用性,以获得至少与直接胎儿心电图相当的信号质量。方法:对5例产妇在分娩过程中同时采集的直接和间接录音,采用分段节拍调制法进行滤波,并进行相关分析,以评估其形态学对应性。信噪比用于量化其质量。结果:直接胎儿心电图幅值高于间接胎儿心电图幅值(中位数:104µV vs. 22µV;P=7.66·10-4),而噪声具有可比性(中位数:70µV vs. 49µV, P=0.45)。直接记录组胎儿心电图振幅显著高于影响噪声组(P=3.17·10-2),间接记录组显著高于影响噪声组(P=1.90·10-3)。因此,直接录音的信噪比最初高于间接录音(中位数:3.3 dB vs. -2.3 dB;P=3.90·10-3),但间接信号去噪后较低(中位数:9.6 dB;4 P = 9.84·打败)。最终,直接和间接记录高度相关(中位数:ρ=0.78;P-208),说明两组心电图在形态学上是相同的。结论:分段心跳调制法对间接胎儿心电图去噪特别有用,可能有助于该无创技术在临床中的推广。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Open Biomedical Engineering Journal
Open Biomedical Engineering Journal Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
4
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信