Related Experiment Videos
Machine learning to classify left ventricular hypertrophy using electrocardiographic feature extraction by
Amulya Gupta1, Christopher J Harvey1, Ashley DeBauge2
1Program for AI & Research in Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, The University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, Kansas.
Background:
Traditional electrocardiographic (ECG) criteria for left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) have modest diagnostic yield.
Objective:
This study aimed to develop and validate machine learning (ML) models for LVH diagnosis from ECG.
Methods:
ECG calculations (rate, intervals, and axis); R-wave, S-wave, and overall-QRS amplitudes; and QRS voltage-time integrals were obtained from 12-lead, vectorcardiographic X-Y-Z-lead, and 3-dimensional (root-sum-square) ECGs. Deep learning-enabled latent embeddings (30 per ECG) were extracted using a variational autoencoder (pretrained on unselected 1.18 million ECGs) from representative-beat signals. Logistic regression, random forest, light gradient boosted machine (LGBM), residual neural network and multilayered perceptron network models using ECG features (calculations and embeddings) and sex, and a convolutional neural network (CNN) using ECG signals alone were trained to predict LVH (left ventricular mass index, women >95 g/m2; men >115 g/m2) on 482,734 ECG-echocardiogram pairs (±45 days). Area under the receiver operating characteristic curves were reported from a holdout testing set.
Results:
In the testing set (n = 54,984), the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for LVH classification was higher for ML models using ECG features (LGBM 0.794; multilayered perceptron 0.793; residual neural network 0.795) than the best individual ECG variable (Z-axis QRS voltage-time integral 0.707), the best traditional criterion (Cornell voltage-duration product 0.716), and the CNN using ECG signals (0.788). Among patients without LVH who had a follow-up echocardiogram >1 year later, LGBM false positives, compared with true negatives, had a 3.07-fold higher odds of developing future LVH (95% confidence interval 2.44-3.86; P < .0001).
Conclusion:
ML models are superior to traditional ECG criteria for classifying LVH. Models trained on extracted ECG features, including deep-learning latent space representations, can outperform CNN models trained on ECG signals.
Related Concept Videos
Cardiomyopathy III: Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy
Cardiomyopathy I: Introduction and Classification
Electrocardiogram
Three major waveforms are present in a typical ECG recording: the P wave, the QRS complex, and the T...