鼻压推导气流限制和通气测量可抵御信号质量下降。

Eric Staykov, Dwayne L Mann, Samu Kainulainen, Brett Duce, Timo Leppanen, Juha Toyras, Scott A Sands, Philip I Terrill
{"title":"鼻压推导气流限制和通气测量可抵御信号质量下降。","authors":"Eric Staykov, Dwayne L Mann, Samu Kainulainen, Brett Duce, Timo Leppanen, Juha Toyras, Scott A Sands, Philip I Terrill","doi":"10.1109/EMBC40787.2023.10340215","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Obstructive sleep apnea is a disorder characterized by partial or complete airway obstructions during sleep. Our previously published algorithms use the minimally invasive nasal pressure signal routinely collected during diagnostic polysomnography (PSG) to segment breaths and estimate airflow limitation (using flow:drive) and minute ventilation for each breath. The first aim of this study was to investigate the effect of airflow signal quality on these algorithms, which can be influenced by oronasal breathing and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). It was hypothesized that these algorithms would make inaccurate estimates when the expiratory portion of breaths is attenuated to simulate oronasal breathing, and pink noise is added to the airflow signal to reduce SNR. At maximum SNR and 0% expiratory amplitude, the average error was 2.7% for flow:drive, -0.5% eupnea for ventilation, and 19.7 milliseconds for breath duration (n = 257,131 breaths). At 20 dB and 0% expiratory amplitude, the average error was -15.1% for flow:drive, 0.1% eupnea for ventilation, and 28.4 milliseconds for breath duration (n = 247,160 breaths). Unexpectedly, simulated oronasal breathing had a negligible effect on flow:drive, ventilation, and breath segmentation algorithms across all SNRs. Airflow SNR ≥ 20 dB had a negligible effect on ventilation and breath segmentation, whereas airflow SNR ≥ 30 dB had a negligible effect on flow:drive. The second aim of this study was to explore the possibility of correcting these algorithms to compensate for airflow signal asymmetry and low SNR. An offset based on estimated SNR applied to individual breath flow:drive estimates reduced the average error to ≤ 1.3% across all SNRs at patient and breath levels, thereby facilitating for flow:drive to be more accurately estimated from PSGs with low airflow SNR.Clinical Relevance- This study demonstrates that our airflow limitation, ventilation, and breath segmentation algorithms are robust to reduced airflow signal quality.</p>","PeriodicalId":72237,"journal":{"name":"Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Annual International Conference","volume":"2023 ","pages":"1-4"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Nasal Pressure Derived Airflow Limitation and Ventilation Measurements are Resilient to Reduced Signal Quality.\",\"authors\":\"Eric Staykov, Dwayne L Mann, Samu Kainulainen, Brett Duce, Timo Leppanen, Juha Toyras, Scott A Sands, Philip I Terrill\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/EMBC40787.2023.10340215\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Obstructive sleep apnea is a disorder characterized by partial or complete airway obstructions during sleep. Our previously published algorithms use the minimally invasive nasal pressure signal routinely collected during diagnostic polysomnography (PSG) to segment breaths and estimate airflow limitation (using flow:drive) and minute ventilation for each breath. The first aim of this study was to investigate the effect of airflow signal quality on these algorithms, which can be influenced by oronasal breathing and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). It was hypothesized that these algorithms would make inaccurate estimates when the expiratory portion of breaths is attenuated to simulate oronasal breathing, and pink noise is added to the airflow signal to reduce SNR. At maximum SNR and 0% expiratory amplitude, the average error was 2.7% for flow:drive, -0.5% eupnea for ventilation, and 19.7 milliseconds for breath duration (n = 257,131 breaths). At 20 dB and 0% expiratory amplitude, the average error was -15.1% for flow:drive, 0.1% eupnea for ventilation, and 28.4 milliseconds for breath duration (n = 247,160 breaths). Unexpectedly, simulated oronasal breathing had a negligible effect on flow:drive, ventilation, and breath segmentation algorithms across all SNRs. Airflow SNR ≥ 20 dB had a negligible effect on ventilation and breath segmentation, whereas airflow SNR ≥ 30 dB had a negligible effect on flow:drive. The second aim of this study was to explore the possibility of correcting these algorithms to compensate for airflow signal asymmetry and low SNR. An offset based on estimated SNR applied to individual breath flow:drive estimates reduced the average error to ≤ 1.3% across all SNRs at patient and breath levels, thereby facilitating for flow:drive to be more accurately estimated from PSGs with low airflow SNR.Clinical Relevance- This study demonstrates that our airflow limitation, ventilation, and breath segmentation algorithms are robust to reduced airflow signal quality.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72237,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Annual International Conference\",\"volume\":\"2023 \",\"pages\":\"1-4\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Annual International Conference\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/EMBC40787.2023.10340215\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Annual International Conference","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/EMBC40787.2023.10340215","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停是一种以睡眠时部分或完全气道阻塞为特征的疾病。我们之前发布的算法使用诊断性多导睡眠图(PSG)中常规收集的微创鼻腔压力信号来分割呼吸,并估算气流限制(使用流量:驱动力)和每次呼吸的分钟通气量。本研究的第一个目的是研究气流信号质量对这些算法的影响,气流信号质量会受到口鼻呼吸和信噪比(SNR)的影响。研究假设,当为模拟口鼻呼吸而减弱呼气部分,并在气流信号中加入粉红噪声以降低信噪比时,这些算法会做出不准确的估计。在信噪比最大和呼气振幅为 0% 的情况下,流量:驱动力的平均误差为 2.7%,通气的平均误差为-0.5%,呼吸持续时间的平均误差为 19.7 毫秒(n = 257,131 次呼吸)。在 20 分贝和 0% 呼气振幅条件下,流量:驱动力的平均误差为-15.1%,通气的平均误差为 0.1%,呼吸持续时间的平均误差为 28.4 毫秒(n = 247,160 次呼吸)。意想不到的是,在所有信噪比下,模拟口鼻呼吸对流量:驱动、通气和呼吸分割算法的影响都微乎其微。气流信噪比≥20 dB对通气和呼吸分割的影响可以忽略不计,而气流信噪比≥30 dB对流量:驱动力的影响可以忽略不计。本研究的第二个目的是探索纠正这些算法的可能性,以补偿气流信号不对称和低信噪比。基于信噪比估计值的偏移应用于单个呼吸流量:驱动力估计值,将患者和呼吸水平上所有信噪比的平均误差减小到≤1.3%,从而有助于从气流信噪比较低的 PSG 中更准确地估计流量:驱动力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Nasal Pressure Derived Airflow Limitation and Ventilation Measurements are Resilient to Reduced Signal Quality.

Obstructive sleep apnea is a disorder characterized by partial or complete airway obstructions during sleep. Our previously published algorithms use the minimally invasive nasal pressure signal routinely collected during diagnostic polysomnography (PSG) to segment breaths and estimate airflow limitation (using flow:drive) and minute ventilation for each breath. The first aim of this study was to investigate the effect of airflow signal quality on these algorithms, which can be influenced by oronasal breathing and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). It was hypothesized that these algorithms would make inaccurate estimates when the expiratory portion of breaths is attenuated to simulate oronasal breathing, and pink noise is added to the airflow signal to reduce SNR. At maximum SNR and 0% expiratory amplitude, the average error was 2.7% for flow:drive, -0.5% eupnea for ventilation, and 19.7 milliseconds for breath duration (n = 257,131 breaths). At 20 dB and 0% expiratory amplitude, the average error was -15.1% for flow:drive, 0.1% eupnea for ventilation, and 28.4 milliseconds for breath duration (n = 247,160 breaths). Unexpectedly, simulated oronasal breathing had a negligible effect on flow:drive, ventilation, and breath segmentation algorithms across all SNRs. Airflow SNR ≥ 20 dB had a negligible effect on ventilation and breath segmentation, whereas airflow SNR ≥ 30 dB had a negligible effect on flow:drive. The second aim of this study was to explore the possibility of correcting these algorithms to compensate for airflow signal asymmetry and low SNR. An offset based on estimated SNR applied to individual breath flow:drive estimates reduced the average error to ≤ 1.3% across all SNRs at patient and breath levels, thereby facilitating for flow:drive to be more accurately estimated from PSGs with low airflow SNR.Clinical Relevance- This study demonstrates that our airflow limitation, ventilation, and breath segmentation algorithms are robust to reduced airflow signal quality.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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