影响心房颤动自动有限导联检测的因素

P. Macfarlane, S. Latif, B. Devine
{"title":"影响心房颤动自动有限导联检测的因素","authors":"P. Macfarlane, S. Latif, B. Devine","doi":"10.23919/CinC49843.2019.9005768","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There has been interest relating to automated analysis of a lead I ECG to detect cardiac arrhythmias. Little interest has been shown in the accuracy of using lead I as opposed to 6 limb leads or the full 12 lead ECG. The aim of this small study was to assess the efficacy of using only lead I but also to look at the effect of analysing a single 30s recording as a continuous recording versus five 10s overlapping recordings constituting a 30s record.One hundred 10s digital 12 lead ECGs with atrial fibrillation (AF) were used. Chest leads were removed and the 6 limb leads then used for analysis of rhythm. Similarly, lead I alone was used. Separately 100 single lead I ECGs classified as AF in the PhysioNet 2017 database were analysed, both as single 30s recordings and as five 10s ECGs commencing at 0, 5, 10, 15 and 20s from the start of the recording. An algorithm made the diagnosis from 5 reports. All analyses were made with the Glasgow Program. For the 10s 12 lead ECGs, 96% were reported as AF using 6 limb leads and 93% using lead I. For the 30s recordings, 92% were reported as AF using a single 30s analysis and 91% as AF using the five ECGs.In conclusion, one lead and 6 leads are not as sensitive as 12 leads in detecting AF, while five 10s reports combined are no more sensitive than a single 30s report though more specific.","PeriodicalId":6697,"journal":{"name":"2019 Computing in Cardiology (CinC)","volume":"38 1","pages":"Page 1-Page 4"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Factors Influencing Automated Limited Lead Detection of Atrial Fibrillation\",\"authors\":\"P. Macfarlane, S. Latif, B. Devine\",\"doi\":\"10.23919/CinC49843.2019.9005768\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"There has been interest relating to automated analysis of a lead I ECG to detect cardiac arrhythmias. Little interest has been shown in the accuracy of using lead I as opposed to 6 limb leads or the full 12 lead ECG. The aim of this small study was to assess the efficacy of using only lead I but also to look at the effect of analysing a single 30s recording as a continuous recording versus five 10s overlapping recordings constituting a 30s record.One hundred 10s digital 12 lead ECGs with atrial fibrillation (AF) were used. Chest leads were removed and the 6 limb leads then used for analysis of rhythm. Similarly, lead I alone was used. Separately 100 single lead I ECGs classified as AF in the PhysioNet 2017 database were analysed, both as single 30s recordings and as five 10s ECGs commencing at 0, 5, 10, 15 and 20s from the start of the recording. An algorithm made the diagnosis from 5 reports. All analyses were made with the Glasgow Program. For the 10s 12 lead ECGs, 96% were reported as AF using 6 limb leads and 93% using lead I. For the 30s recordings, 92% were reported as AF using a single 30s analysis and 91% as AF using the five ECGs.In conclusion, one lead and 6 leads are not as sensitive as 12 leads in detecting AF, while five 10s reports combined are no more sensitive than a single 30s report though more specific.\",\"PeriodicalId\":6697,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2019 Computing in Cardiology (CinC)\",\"volume\":\"38 1\",\"pages\":\"Page 1-Page 4\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2019 Computing in Cardiology (CinC)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.23919/CinC49843.2019.9005768\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2019 Computing in Cardiology (CinC)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23919/CinC49843.2019.9005768","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

有兴趣有关自动分析导联I心电图检测心律失常。与6条肢体导联或完整的12条导联心电图相比,使用导联1的准确性几乎没有什么兴趣。这项小型研究的目的是评估仅使用铅I的效果,同时也观察将单个30秒录音作为连续录音分析与将五个重叠的10秒录音组成30秒记录分析的效果。100例房颤(AF)采用数字12导联心电图。取胸导联,取6条肢体导联进行心律分析。同样地,只使用了铅1。分别分析了PhysioNet 2017数据库中分类为AF的100个单导联I心电图,包括单个30秒记录和从记录开始的0,5,10,15和20s开始的5个10秒心电图。一种算法从5份报告中进行诊断。所有的分析都是用格拉斯哥程序进行的。对于10s - 12导联心电图,使用6条肢体导联报告96%为房颤,使用1导联报告93%为房颤。对于30s记录,使用单个30s分析报告92%为房颤,使用5个心电图报告91%为房颤。综上所述,1导联和6导联对房颤的检测灵敏度不如12导联,而5个10导联加起来的灵敏度并不比单个30导联高,但特异性更强。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Factors Influencing Automated Limited Lead Detection of Atrial Fibrillation
There has been interest relating to automated analysis of a lead I ECG to detect cardiac arrhythmias. Little interest has been shown in the accuracy of using lead I as opposed to 6 limb leads or the full 12 lead ECG. The aim of this small study was to assess the efficacy of using only lead I but also to look at the effect of analysing a single 30s recording as a continuous recording versus five 10s overlapping recordings constituting a 30s record.One hundred 10s digital 12 lead ECGs with atrial fibrillation (AF) were used. Chest leads were removed and the 6 limb leads then used for analysis of rhythm. Similarly, lead I alone was used. Separately 100 single lead I ECGs classified as AF in the PhysioNet 2017 database were analysed, both as single 30s recordings and as five 10s ECGs commencing at 0, 5, 10, 15 and 20s from the start of the recording. An algorithm made the diagnosis from 5 reports. All analyses were made with the Glasgow Program. For the 10s 12 lead ECGs, 96% were reported as AF using 6 limb leads and 93% using lead I. For the 30s recordings, 92% were reported as AF using a single 30s analysis and 91% as AF using the five ECGs.In conclusion, one lead and 6 leads are not as sensitive as 12 leads in detecting AF, while five 10s reports combined are no more sensitive than a single 30s report though more specific.
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
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