Rhythm classifier: artificial intelligence for rhythm classification in insertable cardiac monitor

Abstract Background Though detections improved significantly, separating atrial tachycardia/atrial flutter (AT/AFL) from atrial fibrillations (AF) in insertable cardiac monitors (ICM) remains a challenge. Objective Using artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms to classify AF and AT/AFL in ICM detected episodes, which may reduce episode review burden. Methods Both raw EGM signal and the QRS diminished version of the raw signal were used to extract 14 AF and AT/AFL features from each episode. Extracted features were then represented as an ensemble of features and used to train and test the AI model. Modified ResNet18 network was used as the AI model. All episodes from a random selection of 80% of patients were used as training dataset, another 10% were used as validation, and 10% were used as test dataset, to evaluate model performance. AI model probability threshold was chosen based on validation set results. Episode detection sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) of receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve in the independent test dataset are reported. Results AF and AT/AFL episodes detected in 918 LINQ ICM patients (5,253 AF and 4,705 AT/AFL – 745 pts and 8,950 false detection episodes) were included. Training dataset consisted of 15,183 episodes (735 pts), validation set consisted of 1,901 episodes (91 pts), and test set consisted of 1,824 episodes (92 pts). At chosen threshold in validation set, AF and AT/AFL detection had sensitivity of 90% and 73.3%, respectively, and specificity of 93.2% and 95%, respectively, with AUC of 0.966. In test data, AF and AT/AFL obtained relative sensitivity of 84.7% and 85.7%, respectively, with specificity of 88% and 86.5%, respectively (Fig. A). With ROC-AUC of 0.956 (Fig. B), the relative diagnostic yield of AF and AT/AFL on test data was 95.6%. Conclusion The trained AI model provides a relative sensitivity of about 85% for AF vs. AT/AFL classification and reduces inappropriate ICM detections by 79%. Adding more episodes may improve the performance.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
European Heart Journal
Published
2024-10-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehae666.3485
Primary Topic
Time Series Analysis and Forecasting
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Rhythm classifier: artificial intelligence for rhythm classification in insertable cardiac monitor

Shounak Majumder, Kelli E. King, Sean R. Landman, Shantanu Sarkar
European Heart Journal
Time Series Analysis and Forecasting
article

Rhythm classifier: artificial intelligence for rhythm classification in insertable cardiac monitor

Shounak Majumder, Kelli E. King, Sean R. Landman, Shantanu Sarkar
article en

Abstract

Abstract Background Though detections improved significantly, separating atrial tachycardia/atrial flutter (AT/AFL) from atrial fibrillations (AF) in insertable cardiac monitors (ICM) remains a challenge. Objective Using artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms to classify AF and AT/AFL in ICM detected episodes, which may reduce episode review burden. Methods Both raw EGM signal and the QRS diminished version of the raw signal were used to extract 14 AF and AT/AFL features from each episode. Extracted features were then represented as an ensemble of features and used to train and test the AI model. Modified ResNet18 network was used as the AI model. All episodes from a random selection of 80% of patients were used as training dataset, another 10% were used as validation, and 10% were used as test dataset, to evaluate model performance. AI model probability threshold was chosen based on validation set results. Episode detection sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) of receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve in the independent test dataset are reported. Results AF and AT/AFL episodes detected in 918 LINQ ICM patients (5,253 AF and 4,705 AT/AFL – 745 pts and 8,950 false detection episodes) were included. Training dataset consisted of 15,183 episodes (735 pts), validation set consisted of 1,901 episodes (91 pts), and test set consisted of 1,824 episodes (92 pts). At chosen threshold in validation set, AF and AT/AFL detection had sensitivity of 90% and 73.3%, respectively, and specificity of 93.2% and 95%, respectively, with AUC of 0.966. In test data, AF and AT/AFL obtained relative sensitivity of 84.7% and 85.7%, respectively, with specificity of 88% and 86.5%, respectively (Fig. A). With ROC-AUC of 0.956 (Fig. B), the relative diagnostic yield of AF and AT/AFL on test data was 95.6%. Conclusion The trained AI model provides a relative sensitivity of about 85% for AF vs. AT/AFL classification and reduces inappropriate ICM detections by 79%. Adding more episodes may improve the performance.

European Heart JournalVol. 45(Supplement_1)
Medtronic (Ireland) (IE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 79%
Time Series Analysis and Forecasting
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.