Weidlich Simon, Mannhart Diego, Kennedy Alan, Doggart Peter, Serban Teodor, Knecht Sven, Du Fay de Lavallaz Jeanne, Kühne Michael, Sticherling Christian, Badertscher Patrick
University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Cardiovascular Research Institute Basel (CRIB), Basel, Switzerland.
Cardiovasc Digit Health J. 2023 Dec 27;5(1):29-35. doi: 10.1016/j.cvdhj.2023.12.003. eCollection 2024 Feb.
Multiple smart devices capable of automatically detecting atrial fibrillation (AF) based on single-lead electrocardiograms (SL-ECG) are presently available. The rate of inconclusive tracings by manufacturers' algorithms is currently too high to be clinically useful.
This is a prospective, observational study enrolling patients presenting to a cardiology service at a tertiary referral center. We assessed the clinical value of applying a smart device artificial intelligence (AI)-based algorithm for detecting AF from 4 commercially available smart devices (AliveCor KardiaMobile, Apple Watch 6, Fitbit Sense, and Samsung Galaxy Watch3). Patients underwent a nearly simultaneous 12-lead ECG and 4 smart device SL-ECGs. The novel AI algorithm (PulseAI, Belfast, United Kingdom) was compared with each manufacturer's algorithm.
We enrolled 206 patients (31% female, median age 64 years). AF was present in 60 patients (29%). Sensitivity and specificity for the detection of AF by the novel AI algorithm vs manufacturer algorithm were 88% vs 81% ( = .34) and 97% vs 77% ( < .001) for the AliveCor KardiaMobile, 86% vs 81% ( = .45) and 95% vs 83% ( < .001) for the Apple Watch 6, 91% vs 67% ( < .01) and 94% vs 82% ( < .001) for the Fitbit Sense, and 86% vs 82% ( = .63) and 94% vs 80% ( < .001) for the Samsung Galaxy Watch3, respectively. In addition, the proportion of SL-ECGs with an inconclusive diagnosis (1.2%) was significantly lower for all smart devices using the AI-based algorithm compared to manufacturer's algorithms (14%-17%), < .001.
A novel AI algorithm reduced the rate of inconclusive SL-ECG diagnosis massively while maintaining sensitivity and improving the specificity compared to the manufacturers' algorithms.
目前有多种能够基于单导联心电图(SL-ECG)自动检测房颤(AF)的智能设备。目前制造商算法得出的不确定心电图结果比例过高,不具有临床实用性。
这是一项前瞻性观察性研究,纳入在一家三级转诊中心心内科就诊的患者。我们评估了应用基于智能设备人工智能(AI)的算法从4种市售智能设备(AliveCor KardiaMobile、苹果手表6、Fitbit Sense和三星Galaxy Watch3)检测房颤的临床价值。患者同时接受了一份12导联心电图和4份智能设备单导联心电图检查。将新的AI算法(PulseAI,英国贝尔法斯特)与各制造商的算法进行比较。
我们纳入了206例患者(31%为女性,中位年龄64岁)。60例患者(29%)存在房颤。与制造商算法相比,新AI算法检测房颤的敏感性和特异性在AliveCor KardiaMobile中分别为88%对81%(P = 0.34)和97%对77%(P < 0.001),在苹果手表6中分别为86%对81%(P = 0.45)和95%对83%(P < 0.001),在Fitbit Sense中分别为91%对67%(P < 0.01)和94%对82%(P < 0.001),在三星Galaxy Watch3中分别为86%对82%(P = 0.63)和94%对80%(P < 0.001)。此外,与制造商算法(14%-17%)相比,所有使用基于AI算法的智能设备的单导联心电图不确定诊断比例(1.2%)显著更低,P < 0.001。
与制造商算法相比,一种新的AI算法大幅降低了单导联心电图不确定诊断率,同时保持了敏感性并提高了特异性。