Key result
ICA and PCA methods are suitable for non-invasive estimation of fetal heart rate from maternal abdominal ECGs, but their utility for morphological analysis remains questionable.
Why the study?
Do ICA and PCA methods accurately extract fetal heart rate and morphology from maternal abdominal ECGs compared to fetal scalp electrodes?
Do ICA and PCA methods accurately extract fetal heart rate and morphology from maternal abdominal ECGs compared to fetal scalp electrodes?
ICA and PCA can accurately extract fetal heart rate from maternal abdominal ECGs, but are not yet reliable for morphological ST analysis.
ICA/PCA methods support fHR extraction from real aECGs; leaves open utility for morphological analysis in clinical practice.
Non-adaptive signal processing methods have been successfully applied to extract fetal electrocardiograms (fECGs) from maternal abdominal electrocardiograms (aECGs); and initial tests to evaluate the efficacy of these methods have been carried out by using synthetic data. Nevertheless, performance evaluation of such methods using real data is a much more challenging task and has neither been fully undertaken nor reported in the literature. Therefore, in this investigation, we aimed to compare the effectiveness of two popular non-adaptive methods (the ICA and PCA) to explore the non-invasive (NI) extraction (separation) of fECGs, also known as NI-fECGs from aECGs. The performance of these well-known methods was enhanced by an adaptive algorithm, compensating amplitude difference and time shift between the estimated components. We used real signals compiled in 12 recordings (real01-real12). Five of the recordings were from the publicly available database (PhysioNet-Abdominal and Direct Fetal Electrocardiogram Database), which included data recorded by multiple abdominal electrodes. Seven more recordings were acquired by measurements performed at the Institute of Medical Technology and Equipment, Zabrze, Poland. Therefore, in total we used 60 min of data (i.e., around 88,000 R waves) for our experiments. This dataset covers different gestational ages, fetal positions, fetal positions, maternal body mass indices (BMI), etc. Such a unique heterogeneous dataset of sufficient length combining continuous Fetal Scalp Electrode (FSE) acquired and abdominal ECG recordings allows for robust testing of the applied ICA and PCA methods. The performance of these signal separation methods was then comprehensively evaluated by comparing the fetal Heart Rate (fHR) values determined from the extracted fECGs with those calculated from the fECG signals recorded directly by means of a reference FSE. Additionally, we tested the possibility of non-invasive ST analysis (NI-STAN) by determining the T/QRS ratio. Our results demonstrated that even though these advanced signal processing methods are suitable for the non-invasive estimation and monitoring of the fHR information from maternal aECG signals, their utility for further morphological analysis of the extracted fECG signals remains questionable and warrants further work.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Martínek et al. (2018) studied Fetal monitoring (n=12). Independent Component Analysis (ICA) and Principal Component Analysis (PCA) vs. Fetal Scalp Electrode (FSE) was evaluated on Fetal Heart Rate (fHR) values and T/QRS ratio. ICA and PCA methods are suitable for non-invasive estimation of fetal heart rate from maternal abdominal ECGs, but their utility for morphological analysis remains questionable.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: