Key result
Estimating LVET from tidal waves shows moderate ~0.58 correlation with ECG reference.
Why the study?
Wearable integration of left ventricular ejection time requires accessible estimation methods, but whether tidal wave features in arterial blood pressure and photoplethysmography signals reliably estimate ejection time remained to be evaluated.
Can left ventricular ejection time be accurately estimated from arterial blood pressure and photoplethysmography signals based on the tidal wave compared to ECG?
Observational
Can left ventricular ejection time be accurately estimated from arterial blood pressure and photoplethysmography signals based on the tidal wave compared to ECG?
LVET estimation from PPG and ABP signals based on the tidal wave shows moderate correlation with ECG, highlighting the need for advanced compensation techniques for clinical-grade accuracy in wearables.
Moderate correlation precludes clinical-grade LVET estimation from ABP/PPG; leaves open need for contractility-adjusted algorithms in wearables.
Left ventricular ejection time (LVET) is an important parameter for assessing cardiovascular disorders. In a medical office, it is typically measured using the Tissue Doppler Imaging technique, but new wearable devices have led to a growing interest in integrating this parameter into them, increasing accessibility to personalized healthcare for users and patients. In the cardiovascular domain, photoplethysmography (PPG) is a promising technology that shares two distinctive features with invasive arterial blood pressure (ABP) tracing: the tidal wave (TDW) and the dicrotic wave (DCW). In the early years of cardiovascular research, the duration of the dicrotic point was initially linked to the ending phase of left ventricular ejection. Subsequent studies reported deviations from the initial association, suggesting that the ejection period is related to the tidal wave feature. In this current study, we measured left ventricular ejection time in both ABP and PPG waveforms, considering recent research results. A total of 27,000 cardiac cycles were analyzed for both afore-mentioned signals. The reference value for ejection time was computed based on the T-wave segment duration from the electrocardiogram waveform. In lower blood pressure, which is associated with decreased heart contractility, the results indicated an underestimation of −29 ± 19 ms in ABP and an overestimation of 18 ± 31 ms in PPG. On the other side of the spectrum, during increased contractility, the minimum errors were −3 ± 18 ms and 4 ± 33 ms, respectively. Since the tidal wave feature is strongly affected by arterial tree compliance, the population evaluation results indicate a Pearson’s correlation factor of 0.58 in the ABP case, and 0.53 in PPG. These findings highlight the need for advanced compensation techniques, in particular for PPG assessment, to achieve clinical-grade accuracy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Evdochim et al. (2023) conducted an observational in Cardiovascular disorders. Left ventricular ejection time estimation from ABP and PPG waveforms vs. T-wave segment duration from electrocardiogram was evaluated on Left ventricular ejection time estimation error and correlation. Estimating left ventricular ejection time from the tidal wave feature showed moderate correlation with ECG reference (r=0.58 for arterial blood pressure and r=0.53 for photoplethysmography).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: