Why the study?
Does the addition of permutation entropy to HRV and EDR features improve the detection of obstructive sleep apnea events in ECG recordings?
Does the addition of permutation entropy to HRV and EDR features improve the detection of obstructive sleep apnea events in ECG recordings?
The integration of permutation entropy from heart rate variability with other ECG-derived features improves the automated detection of obstructive sleep apnea events.
Supports ECG-based OSA detection with added permutation entropy; leaves open prospective validation before clinical use.
In this paper the permutation entropy (PE) obtained from heart rate variability (HRV) is analyzed in a statistical model. In this model we also integrate other feature extraction techniques, the cepstrum coefficients derived from the same HRV and a set of band powers obtained from the electrocardiogram derived respiratory (EDR) signal. The aim of the model is detecting obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) events. For this purpose, we apply two statistical classification methods: Logistic Regression (LR) and Quadratic Discriminant Analysis (QDA). For testing the models we use seventy ECG recordings from the Physionet database which are divided into equal-size learning and testing sets. Both sets consist of 35 recordings, each containing a single ECG signal. In our experiments we have found that the features extracted from the EDR signal present a sensitivity of 65.6% and specificity of 87.7% (auc = 85) in the LR classifier, and sensitivity of 59.4% and specificity of 90.3% (auc = 83.9) in the QDA classifier. The HRV-based cepstrum coefficients present a sensitivity of 63.8% and specificity of 89.2% (auc = 86) in the LR classifier, and sensitivity of 67.2% and specificity of 86.8% (auc = 86.9) in the QDA. Subsequent tests show that the contribution of the permutation entropy increases the performance of the classifiers, implying that the complexity of RR interval time series play an important role in the breathing pauses detection. Particularly, when all features are jointly used, the quantification task reaches a sensitivity of 71.9% and specificity of 92.1% (auc = 90.3) for LR. Similarly, for QDA the sensitivity is 75.1% and the specificity is 90.5% (auc = 91.7).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ravelo‐García et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: