Key result
Automatic channel selection for cardiac time intervals correlates more strongly with visual selection than traditional auscultation.
Why the study?
Traditional auscultation areas remain a gold standard, but their suitability for estimating Cardiac Time Intervals from digital heart sounds had never been thoroughly explored.
Does automatic channel selection improve the estimation of Cardiac Time Intervals compared to traditional auscultation areas?
Observational
Does automatic channel selection improve the estimation of Cardiac Time Intervals compared to traditional auscultation areas?
Effect estimate: R = 0.73 to 0.96 (vs visual); R = 0.49 to 0.92 (vs traditional)
The spatial variation of heart sound waveforms significantly impacts the estimation of Cardiac Time Intervals, suggesting that auscultation areas should be optimized based on the specific clinical task rather than relying solely on traditional sites.
Challenges reliance on traditional auscultation sites for CTI; leaves open whether automatic selection improves clinical outcomes.
Although clinicians still regard traditional auscultation as a key bedside assessment tool, interest in its digital counterpart has recently grown. Digitalizing heart sounds enables the extraction without the need of echocardiography of novel clinical indicators like Cardiac Time Intervals (CTIs), temporal parameters reflecting the hemodynamic behavior of the heart. The estimate of the CTIs grounds on the identification of the time of closure of heart valves, which the human ear cannot perceive - but algorithms can. Traditional auscultation areas are still considered a gold standard, but their suitability for CTI estimation was never thoroughly explored. In this study, we analyze the spatial variability of heart sound waveforms over the chest with high spatial resolution. We estimate the time of closure of cardiac valves and define a goal-oriented objective function to automatically identify the best auscultation area for each valve. We compare the selection against visual inspection (manually selecting the signals where discriminating between the left- and right-heart contributions was possible) and against the traditional auscultation areas. We found that the spatial similarity pattern of the sound waveforms recorded using the multi-source sensor is consistent with expectations. The variation in morphology produces a variation in the estimates, whose standard deviation ranges from 7 to 13 milliseconds, potentially causing issues in clinical interpretation. This proves that the selection of the recording point impacts the estimate and must be carefully defined. The estimates resulting from the automatic channel selection present higher correlation coefficients against visual selection (R = 0,73 to 0,96) than against traditional auscultation (R = 0,49 to 0,92). We can conclude that the definition of the best auscultation areas should be considered a goal-dependent task and that the spatial variability of heart sounds plays a role in obtaining robust estimates of clinical biomarkers.Clinical Relevance-The reported spatial variation of the heart sound waveforms makes the definition of the best auscultation areas a goal-dependent task that should be adapted to the clinical task.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Giordano et al. (2025) conducted an observational in Cardiac Time Intervals estimation. Automatic channel selection vs. Visual selection and traditional auscultation was evaluated on Correlation coefficients of Cardiac Time Intervals estimates (R = 0.73 to 0.96 (vs visual); R = 0.49 to 0.92 (vs traditional)). Automatic channel selection for estimating Cardiac Time Intervals showed higher correlation with visual selection (R=0.73-0.96) than against traditional auscultation (R=0.49-0.92).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: