Suppr超能文献

不同心电图与心向量图变换的比较。

Comparison of Different Electrocardiography with Vectorcardiography Transformations.

机构信息

Department of Cybernetics and Biomedical Engineering, Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, VSB-Technical University of Ostrava, 17. listopadu 15, 708 33 Ostrava, Czech Republic.

出版信息

Sensors (Basel). 2019 Jul 11;19(14):3072. doi: 10.3390/s19143072.

Abstract

This paper deals with transformations from electrocardiographic (ECG) to vectorcardiographic (VCG) leads. VCG provides better sensitivity, for example for the detection of myocardial infarction, ischemia, and hypertrophy. However, in clinical practice, measurement of VCG is not usually used because it requires additional electrodes placed on the patient's body. Instead, mathematical transformations are used for deriving VCG from 12-leads ECG. In this work, Kors quasi-orthogonal transformation, inverse Dower transformation, Kors regression transformation, and linear regression-based transformations for deriving P wave (PLSV) and QRS complex (QLSV) are implemented and compared. These transformation methods were not yet compared before, so we have selected them for this paper. Transformation methods were compared for the data from the Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB) database and their accuracy was evaluated using a mean squared error (MSE) and a correlation coefficient (R) between the derived and directly measured Frank's leads. Based on the statistical analysis, Kors regression transformation was significantly more accurate for the derivation of the X and Y leads than the others. For the Z lead, there were no statistically significant differences in the medians between Kors regression transformation and the PLSV and QLSV methods. This paper thoroughly compared multiple VCG transformation methods to conventional VCG Frank's orthogonal lead system, used in clinical practice.

摘要

本文探讨了从心电图(ECG)到心向量图(VCG)导联的变换。VCG 提供了更好的灵敏度,例如用于检测心肌梗塞、缺血和肥大。然而,在临床实践中,通常不使用 VCG 的测量,因为它需要在患者身体上放置额外的电极。相反,使用数学变换从 12 导联 ECG 推导出 VCG。在这项工作中,实现并比较了 Kors 拟正交变换、逆 Dower 变换、Kors 回归变换和基于线性回归的 P 波(PLSV)和 QRS 复合波(QLSV)推导变换方法。这些变换方法以前尚未进行比较,因此我们选择它们用于本文。比较了来自 Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt(PTB)数据库的数据的变换方法,并使用均方误差(MSE)和直接测量的 Frank 导联之间的相关系数(R)来评估它们的准确性。基于统计分析,Kors 回归变换在推导 X 和 Y 导联方面比其他方法更准确。对于 Z 导联,Kors 回归变换与 PLSV 和 QLSV 方法之间的中位数没有统计学上的显著差异。本文全面比较了多种 VCG 变换方法与临床实践中使用的传统 VCG Frank 正交导联系统。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b32a/6678609/8bbd0c3f0521/sensors-19-03072-g001.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验