Point-of-care screening for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction using artificial intelligence during ECG-enabled stethoscope examination in London, UK: a prospective, observational, multicentre study

Patrik Bachtiger, Camille F Petri, Francesca E Scott, Se Ri Park, Mihir A Kelshiker, Harpreet K Sahemey, Bianca Dumea, Regine Alquero, Pritpal S Padam, Isobel R Hatrick, Alfa Ali, Maria Ribeiro, Wing-See Cheung, Nina Bual, Bushra Rana, Matthew Shun-Shin, Daniel B Kramer, Alex Fragoyannis, Daniel Keene, Carla M Plymen, Nicholas S Peters, Patrik Bachtiger, Camille F Petri, Francesca E Scott, Se Ri Park, Mihir A Kelshiker, Harpreet K Sahemey, Bianca Dumea, Regine Alquero, Pritpal S Padam, Isobel R Hatrick, Alfa Ali, Maria Ribeiro, Wing-See Cheung, Nina Bual, Bushra Rana, Matthew Shun-Shin, Daniel B Kramer, Alex Fragoyannis, Daniel Keene, Carla M Plymen, Nicholas S Peters

Abstract

Background: Most patients who have heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction, when left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is 40% or lower, are diagnosed in hospital. This is despite previous presentations to primary care with symptoms. We aimed to test an artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm applied to a single-lead ECG, recorded during ECG-enabled stethoscope examination, to validate a potential point-of-care screening tool for LVEF of 40% or lower.

Methods: We conducted an observational, prospective, multicentre study of a convolutional neural network (known as AI-ECG) that was previously validated for the detection of reduced LVEF using 12-lead ECG as input. We used AI-ECG retrained to interpret single-lead ECG input alone. Patients (aged ≥18 years) attending for transthoracic echocardiogram in London (UK) were recruited. All participants had 15 s of supine, single-lead ECG recorded at the four standard anatomical positions for cardiac auscultation, plus one handheld position, using an ECG-enabled stethoscope. Transthoracic echocardiogram-derived percentage LVEF was used as ground truth. The primary outcome was performance of AI-ECG at classifying reduced LVEF (LVEF ≤40%), measured using metrics including the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), sensitivity, and specificity, with two-sided 95% CIs. The primary outcome was reported for each position individually and with an optimal combination of AI-ECG outputs (interval range 0-1) from two positions using a rule-based approach and several classification models. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04601415.

Findings: Between Feb 6 and May 27, 2021, we recruited 1050 patients (mean age 62 years [SD 17·4], 535 [51%] male, 432 [41%] non-White). 945 (90%) had an ejection fraction of at least 40%, and 105 (10%) had an ejection fraction of 40% or lower. Across all positions, ECGs were most frequently of adequate quality for AI-ECG interpretation at the pulmonary position (979 [93·3%] of 1050). Quality was lowest for the aortic position (846 [80·6%]). AI-ECG performed best at the pulmonary valve position (p=0·02), with an AUROC of 0·85 (95% CI 0·81-0·89), sensitivity of 84·8% (76·2-91·3), and specificity of 69·5% (66·4-72·6). Diagnostic odds ratios did not differ by age, sex, or non-White ethnicity. Taking the optimal combination of two positions (pulmonary and handheld positions), the rule-based approach resulted in an AUROC of 0·85 (0·81-0·89), sensitivity of 82·7% (72·7-90·2), and specificity of 79·9% (77·0-82·6). Using AI-ECG outputs from these two positions, a weighted logistic regression with l2 regularisation resulted in an AUROC of 0·91 (0·88-0·95), sensitivity of 91·9% (78·1-98·3), and specificity of 80·2% (75·5-84·3).

Interpretation: A deep learning system applied to single-lead ECGs acquired during a routine examination with an ECG-enabled stethoscope can detect LVEF of 40% or lower. These findings highlight the potential for inexpensive, non-invasive, workflow-adapted, point-of-care screening, for earlier diagnosis and prognostically beneficial treatment.

Funding: NHS Accelerated Access Collaborative, NHSX, and the National Institute for Health Research.

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of interests We declare no competing interests.

Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Schematic of ECG-enabled stethoscope and AI-ECG Illustration of anatomical positions for auscultation and position-specific angulation (vector) of ECG-enabled stethoscope; and flow diagram of raw ECG data to cloud-based CNN for interpretation of AI-ECG, with illustration of how raw outputs are classified according to adjustable (optimised) threshold. Anatomical images adapted from BioRender. AI=artificial intelligence. CNN=convolutional neural network. LVEF=left ventricular ejection fraction.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Study profile TTE=transthoracic echocardiogram. LVEF=left ventricular ejection fraction. NHS=National Health Service. *Three hospitals and four community centres.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Receiver operating characteristic curves detection of reduced LVEF Data are shown for the single-best performing position (pulmonary), rule-based optimal combination of two positions (pulmonary and handheld), and exploratory logistic regression model with l2 regularisation using AI-enabled ECG outputs from optimal combination of two positions. AUROC=area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. LR=logistic regression. LVEF=left ventricular ejection fraction.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Convolutional neural network's sensitivity and specificity to detect LVEF ≤40% Data are tabulated across a range stratified into age bands by sex, and by non-White ethnicity, using results from the pulmonary position at the threshold maximising the sum of sensitivity and specificity. The diagnostic OR and associated 95% CI is shown for each group and for the overall study sample. For sensitivity, data presented in brackets represents the number of patients in each group who had a positive result, with the denominator the number of patients with LVEF ≤40%. For specificity, this is the number of patients with a negative result, with the denominator patients with LVEF>40%. OR=odds ratio. LVEF=left ventricular ejection fraction.

References

    1. Bottle A, Kim D, Aylin P, Cowie MR, Majeed A, Hayhoe B. Routes to diagnosis of heart failure: observational study using linked data in England. Heart. 2018;104:600–605.
    1. Heidenreich PA, Albert NM, Allen LA, et al. Forecasting the impact of heart failure in the United States: a policy statement from the American Heart Association. Circ Heart Fail. 2013;6:606–619.
    1. Ambrosy AP, Fonarow GC, Butler J, et al. The global health and economic burden of hospitalizations for heart failure: lessons learned from hospitalized heart failure registries. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63:1123–1133.
    1. National Health Service The NHS long term plan. Jan 7, 2019.
    1. Bozkurt B, Coats AJS, Tsutsui H, et al. Universal definition and classification of heart failure: a report of the Heart Failure Society of America, Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology, Japanese Heart Failure Society and Writing Committee of the Universal Definition. Eur J Heart Fail. 2021;23:352–380.
    1. Solomon SD, McMurray JJV, Anand IS, et al. Angiotensin-neprilysin inhibition in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. N Engl J Med. 2019;381:1609–1620.
    1. Burnett H, Earley A, Voors AA, et al. Thirty years of evidence on the efficacy of drug treatments for chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: a network meta-analysis. Circ Heart Fail. 2017;10
    1. Bloom MW, Greenberg B, Jaarsma T, et al. Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2017;3
    1. Attia ZI, Kapa S, Lopez-Jimenez F, et al. Screening for cardiac contractile dysfunction using an artificial intelligence-enabled electrocardiogram. Nat Med. 2019;25:70–74.
    1. Adedinsewo D, Carter RE, Attia Z, et al. Artificial intelligence-enabled ECG algorithm to identify patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction presenting to the emergency department with dyspnea. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2020;13
    1. Attia ZI, Kapa S, Noseworthy PA, Lopez-Jimenez F, Friedman PA. Artificial intelligence ECG to detect left ventricular dysfunction in COVID-19: a case series. Mayo Clin Proc. 2020;95:2464–2466.
    1. Attia ZI, Kapa S, Yao X, et al. Prospective validation of a deep learning electrocardiogram algorithm for the detection of left ventricular systolic dysfunction. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2019;30:668–674.
    1. Attia IZ, Tseng AS, Benavente ED, et al. External validation of a deep learning electrocardiogram algorithm to detect ventricular dysfunction. Int J Cardiol. 2021;329:130–135.
    1. Yao X, Rushlow DR, Inselman JW, et al. Artificial intelligence-enabled electrocardiograms for identification of patients with low ejection fraction: a pragmatic, randomized clinical trial. Nat Med. 2021;27:815–819.
    1. Office for National Statistics Ethnic group, national identity, and religion. 2021.
    1. British Society of Echocardiography Protocols and guidelines. 2021.
    1. DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics. 1988;44:837–845.
    1. Savarese G, Lund LH. Global public health burden of heart failure. Card Fail Rev. 2017;3:7–11.
    1. de Couto G, Ouzounian M, Liu PP. Early detection of myocardial dysfunction and heart failure. Nat Rev Cardiol. 2010;7:334–344.
    1. Cowie MR. The heart failure epidemic: a UK perspective. Echo Res Pract. 2017;4:R15–R20.
    1. Schwalbe N, Wahl B. Artificial intelligence and the future of global health. Lancet. 2020;395:1579–1586.
    1. Celi LA, Fine B, Stone DJ. An awakening in medicine: the partnership of humanity and intelligent machines. Lancet Digit Health. 2019;1:e255–e257.
    1. O'Neal WT, Mazur M, Bertoni AG, et al. Electrocardiographic predictors of heart failure with reduced versus preserved ejection fraction: the multi-ethnic study of atherosclerosis. J Am Heart Assoc. 2017;6
    1. Hendry PB, Krisdinarti L, Erika M. Scoring system based on electrocardiogram features to predict the type of heart failure in patients with chronic heart failure. Cardiol Res. 2016;7:110–116.
    1. Alhamaydeh M, Gregg R, Ahmad A, Faramand Z, Saba S, Al-Zaiti S. Identifying the most important ECG predictors of reduced ejection fraction in patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome. J Electrocardiol. 2020;61:81–85.
    1. Rim TH, Lee CJ, Tham Y-C, et al. Deep-learning-based cardiovascular risk stratification using coronary artery calcium scores predicted from retinal photographs. Lancet Digit Health. 2021;3:e306–e316.
    1. Topol EJ. High-performance medicine: the convergence of human and artificial intelligence. Nat Med. 2019;25:44–56.
    1. Parikh RB, Obermeyer Z, Navathe AS. Regulation of predictive analytics in medicine. Science. 2019;363:810–812.
    1. Nagendran M, Chen Y, Lovejoy CA, et al. Artificial intelligence versus clinicians: systematic review of design, reporting standards, and claims of deep learning studies. BMJ. 2020;368:m689.
    1. Orchard J, Li J, Gallagher R, Freedman B, Lowres N, Neubeck L. Uptake of a primary care atrial fibrillation screening program (AF-SMART): a realist evaluation of implementation in metropolitan and rural general practice. BMC Fam Pract. 2019;20:170.
    1. Wahl B, Cossy-Gantner A, Germann S, Schwalbe NR. Artificial intelligence (AI) and global health: how can AI contribute to health in resource-poor settings? BMJ Glob Health. 2018;3
    1. Chorba JS, Shapiro AM, Le L, et al. Deep learning algorithm for automated cardiac murmur detection via a digital stethoscope platform. J Am Heart Assoc. 2021;10
    1. Attia ZI, Noseworthy PA, Lopez-Jimenez F, et al. An artificial intelligence-enabled ECG algorithm for the identification of patients with atrial fibrillation during sinus rhythm: a retrospective analysis of outcome prediction. Lancet. 2019;394:861–867.
    1. Hagiwara Y, Fujita H, Oh SL, et al. Computer-aided diagnosis of atrial fibrillation based on ECG signals: a review. Inf Sci. 2018;467:99–114.

Source: PubMed

3
Sottoscrivi