...
首页> 外文期刊>Annals of Biomedical Engineering: The Journal of the Biomedical Engineering Society >Localization of Ventricular Activation Origin from the 12-Lead ECG: A Comparison of Linear Regression with Non-Linear Methods of Machine Learning
【24h】

Localization of Ventricular Activation Origin from the 12-Lead ECG: A Comparison of Linear Regression with Non-Linear Methods of Machine Learning

机译:来自12引导ECG的心室激活来源的定位:用机器学习非线性方法的线性回归比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

We have previously developed an automated localization method based on multiple linear regression (MLR) model to estimate the activation origin on a generic left-ventricular (LV) endocardial surface in real time from the 12-lead ECG. The present study sought to investigate whether machine learningnamely, random-forest regression (RFR) and support-vector regression (SVR)can improve the localization accuracy compared to MLR. For 38 patients the 12-lead ECG was acquired during LV endocardial pacing at 1012 sites with known coordinates exported from an electroanatomic mapping system; each pacing site was then registered to a generic LV endocardial surface subdivided into 16 segments tessellated into 238 triangles. ECGs were reduced to one variable per lead, consisting of 120-ms time integral of the QRS. To compare three regression models, the entire dataset (n=1012) was partitioned at random into a design set with 80% and a test set with the remaining 20% of the entire set, and the localization errormeasured as geodesic distance on the generic LV surfacewas assessed. Bootstrap method with replacement, using 1000 resampling trials, estimated each model's error distribution for the left-out sample (n similar or equal to 371). In the design set (n=810), the mean accuracy was 8.8, 12.1, and 12.9mm, respectively for SVR, RVR and MLR. In the test set (n=202), the mean value of the localization error in the SVR model was consistently lower than the other two models, both in comparison with the MLR (11.4 vs. 12.5mm), and with the RFR (11.4 vs. 12.0mm); the RFR model was also better than the MLR model for estimating localization accuracy (12.0 vs. 12.5mm). The bootstrap method with 1,000 trials confirmed that the SVR and RFR models had significantly higher predictive accurate than the MLR in the bootstrap assessment with the left-out sample (SVR vs. MLR (p0.01), RFR vs. MLR (p0.01)). The performance comparison of regression models showed that a modest improvement in localization accuracy can be achieved by SVR and RFR models, in comparison with MLR. The population coefficients generated by the optimized SVR model from our dataset are superior to the previously-derived population coefficients generated by the MLR model and can supersede them to improve the localization of ventricular activation on the generic LV endocardial surface.
机译:我们之前已经开发了一种基于多元线性回归(MLR)模型的自动定位方法,从12引导ECG实时地实时地估计通用左心室(LV)内膜表面上的激活来源。目前的研究试图调查机器学习,随机森林回归(RFR)和支持 - 向量回归(SVR)与MLR相比,可以提高本地化精度。对于38例患者,在1012个位点在1012个位点的LV心膜膜上定位期间获得了12-铅ECG,其中已知从电灭制系统出口的坐标;然后将每个起搏部位注册到通用的LV内膜表面,细分为16个段,使其形成为238个三角形。 ECG减少到每条铅的一个变量,由QRS的120ms时间整数组成。要比较三个回归模型,整个数据集(n = 1012)随机分区为80%的设计集和一个测试集,其中包含整个集合的剩余20%,并且本地化是通用LV上的GeodeSic距离的情况下令人难以置信Surfacewas评估。使用1000个重采样试验的替换方法,估计每个模型的左输出样本的错误分布(n类似或等于371)。在设计集(n = 810)中,对于SVR,RVR和MLR,平均精度分别为8.8,12.1和12.9mm。在测试集(n = 202)中,SVR模型中的定位误差的平均值始终低于与MLR(11.4与12.5mm)相比的其他两个模型,以及RFR(11.4与12.0mm); RFR模型也比MLR模型更好,用于估算定位精度(12.0与12.5mm)。具有1,000个试验的引导方法证实,SVR和RFR模型的预测精度明显高于左输出样品(SVR与MLR(P <0.01),RFR与MLR(P <0.01) )))。回归模型的性能比较表明,与MLR相比,SVR和RFR模型可以通过SVR和RFR模型实现适度的局部化精度的改善。来自我们数据集的优化SVR模型产生的人口系数优于由MLR模型产生的先前推导的群数系数,并且可以取代它们以改善通用LV外阴表面上心室激活的定位。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号