1000/1000
Hot
Most Recent
The electrocardiogram (ECG) is among the most commonly utilized clinical tests for patient monitoring and assessment because it is easy to acquire and provides extensive information about patients’ cardiac health. Instead, continuous, real-time, remote monitoring allows for a more rigorous oversight of patients’ conditions, even compared to in-hospital observation. Wearable devices to address monitoring are now a prominent focus of industry, which in turn provides strong motivation for applying artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms to ECG signals for automated disease detection and prediction.
Authors (Year) | Specific Application | ECG System (Sampling Frequency) |
AI Algorithm/Method | Database/Dataset | Performance (%) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Acc | Sen | Spe | AUC | F1 | |||||
Jeon et al. (2020) [25] | General arrhythmias | 2-lead ECG patch [Samsung S-Patch 2] (256 Hz) |
Recurrent Neural Networks | MIT-BIH Arrhythmia Wearable device: S-Patch 2 |
99.80 | - | - | - | - |
Plawiak et al. (2020) [37] | General arrhythmias | - | Deep Genetic Ensemble of Classifiers | MIT-BIH Arrhythmia | 99.37 | 94.62 | 99.66 | - | - |
Panganiban et al. (2021) [16] | General arrhythmias | 2-lead ECG [HealthyPiV3 biosensors] (n.s.) |
CNN | MIT-BIH Atrial Fibrillation, PAF Prediction Challenge, PTB Diagnostic ECG, Challenge 2015 Training Set, Fantasia, and PAF Prediction Challenge. ECG signals collected for this study | 98.73 | 96.83 | 99.21 | - | 96.83 |
Alqudah et al. (2021) [59] | General arrhythmias | - | CNN | IEEE DataPort MIT-BIH Arrhythmia |
99.13 | 99.31 | 99.81 | - | - |
Yildirim et al. (2018) [38] | General arrhythmias | - | CNN | MIT-BIH Arrhythmia | 95.20 | 93.52 | 99.61 | - | 92.45 |
Bazi et al. (2020) [26] | General arrhythmias | Wireless 3-lead ECG sensor [Shimmer Sensing (100, 200 Hz) |
SVM | 12-lead Tech-Patient CARDIO ECG simulator Wearable device: Shimmer Sensing MIT-BIH Arrhythmia |
95.10 | 95.80 | - | - | - |
Lee et al. (2022) [30] | General arrhythmias | - | CNN | ECG from patients at the Korea University Anam Hospital in Seoul, Korea | 97.90 | 98.30 | 97.60 | 99.70 | 97.70 |
Itzhak et al. (2022) [32] | General arrhythmias | - | Random Forest | Annotated Holter ECG database acquired at the University of Virginia Heart Station | 93.30 | 91.30 | 81.30 | 95.30 | 90.60 |
Li et al. (2018) [48] | General arrhythmias | - | Generic CNN and Tuned Dedicated CNN | MIT-BIH Arrhythmia | 96.89 | - | - | - | - |
Ran et al. (2022) [53] | General arrhythmias | 12-lead ECG prototype (500Hz) |
Deep CNN | 12-lead ECG recordings from three centers of Tongji Hospital | - | 89.10 | 99.70 | 94.40 | 91.30 |
Ribeiro et al. (2022) [52] | General arrhythmias | - | CNN | MIT-BIH Arrhythmia | 99.60 | 98.50 | 99.80 | - | 98.80 |
Hua et al. (2018) [36] | General arrhythmias | - | SVM | MIT-BIH Arrhythmia | 98.58 | 97.70 | 99.62 | - | - |
Karthiga et al. (2021) [39] | General arrhythmias | - | CNN | MIT-BIH Arrhythmia | 91.92 | 90.21 | 95.19 | - | 90.11 |
Zhang et al. (2022) [40] | General arrhythmias | - | CNN | MIT-BIH Arrhythmia | 98.74 | 98.11 | 99.05 | - | - |
Lee et al. (2021) [60] | General arrhythmias | - | Beat-Interval-Texture CNN | 2017 PhysioNet/Computing in Cardiology Challenge | - | 80.73 | - | - | 81.75 |
Smisek et al. (2018) [34] | General arrhythmias | - | SVMs Decision Tree | 2017 PhysioNet/Computing in Cardiology Challenge |
- | - | - | - | 81.00 |
Shin et al. (2022) [45] | General arrhythmias | - | CNN-Bidirectional Long Short-Term Memory | MIT-BIH Arrhythmia | 91.70 | 92.00 | 91.00 | 99.40 | 92.00 |
Alqudah et al. (2021) [62] | General arrhythmias | - | CNN | MIT-BIH Arrhythmia | 93.80 | 95.20 | 97.40 | - | 93.60 |
Huang, et al. (2021) [44] | General arrhythmias | - | CNN-LSTM | MIT-BIH Arrhythmia | 98.93 | 96.46 | 99.33 | - | - |
Tang et al. (2019) [35] | General arrhythmias | - | SVM | MIT-BIH Arrhythmia | 98.90 | 92.80 | 99.40 | - | 92.00 |
Sakib et al. (2021) [51] | General arrhythmias | - | Deep-Learning-based Lightweight Arrhythmia Classification (CNN) | MIT-BIH Supraventricular Arrhythmia MIT-BIH Arrhythmia St Petersburg INCART 12-lead Arrhythmia Sudden Cardiac Death Holter |
96.67 | - | - | 97.96 | - |
Shao et al. (2020) [22] | AF | Custom 1-lead ECG patch (250 Hz) |
Decision Tree Ensemble | 2017 PhysioNet/Computing in Cardiology Challenge MIT-BIH Atrial Fibrillation Simulated ECG signals from generator FLUKE MPS450 |
99.62 | 99.61 | 99.64 | - | 92.00 |
Chen et al. (2020) [15] | AF | PPG & 1-lead ECG [Amazfit Health Band 1S] (250 Hz) |
CNN | PPG and single-channel ECG data | 94.76 | 87.33 | 99.20 | - | - |
Cai et al. (2020) [42] | AF | 12-lead ECG (500 Hz) |
Deep Densely connected Neural Network | 12-lead ECG 10s recordings collected from multiple hospitals and wearable ECG devices (3 different data sources) | 99.35 | 99.19 | 99.44 | - | - |
Cheng et al. (2020) [57] | AF | - | Deep Learning Neural Networks | MIT-BIH Atrial Fibrillation | 97.52 | 97.59 | 97.40 | - | 98.02 |
Fan et al. (2018) [49] | AF | - | Multi-Scale CNN | 2017 PhysioNet/Computing in Cardiology Challenge | 98.13 | 93.77 | 98.77 | - | - |
Ramesh et al. (2021) [41] | AF | - | CNN | Train: MIT-BIH Normal Sinus Rhythm, MIT-BIH Atrial Fibrillation, MIT-BIH Arrhythmia Test: UMass PPG, acquired from wrist-worn wearable devices |
95.50 | 94.50 | 96.00 | 95.30 | 93.40 |
Ma et al. (2020) [27] | AF | SmartVest system (400 Hz) |
SVM extended with CNN predictions | Train: MIT-BIH Atrial Fibrillation Test: PhysioNet/Computing in Cardiology Challenge 2017, China Physiological Signal Challenge (CPSC) 2018, 24-h ECG recording (12 h before and 12 h after the radio frequency ablation surgery) collected from an AF patient with the wearable device |
99.08 | 98.67 | 99.50 | - | - |
Lown et al. (2020) [17] | AF | 1. 12-lead ECG (n.s.) 2. HR monitor [Polar H7 (PH7) HR] (n.s.) |
SVM | MIT-BIH Atrial Fibrillation MIT-BIH Arrhythmia |
- | 100.0 | 97.60 | - | - |
Zhang et al. (2021) [50] | AF | - | Global Hybrid Multi-Scale Convolutional Neural Network | China Physiological Signal Challenge 2018 (12-lead ECG) 2017 PhysioNet/Computing in Cardiology Challenge (single-lead ECG) |
99.84 | 99.65 | 99.98 | - | 99.54 |
Zhang et al. (2020) [58] | AF | - | CNN | MIT-BIH Atrial Fibrillation | 96.23 | 95.92 | 96.55 | - | 96.25 |
Chen et al. (2022) [43] | AF | - | Feedforward Neural Network | 2017 PhysioNet/Computing in Cardiology Challenge MIT-BIH Arrhythmia |
84.00 | 84.26 | 93.23 | 89.40 | - |
Mei et al. (2018) [33] | AF | - | Baggin Trees | 2017 PhysioNet/Computing in Cardiology Challenge |
96.60 | 83.20 | 98.60 | - | - |
Wu et al. (2020) [31] | AF | - | Extreme Gradient Boosting | 2017 PhysioNet/Computing in Cardiology Challenge MIT-BIH Atrial Fibrillation MIT-BIH Normal Sinus Rhythm MIT-BIH Arrhythmia |
95.47 | 94.59 | 96.40 | - | 95.56 |
Bashar et al. (2021) [7] | AF, PAC and PVC | - | SVM | Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care (MIMIC) III | 97.45 | 98.99 | 95.18 | - | - |
Yu et al. (2021) [6] | PVCs | - | Deep Metric Learning K-Nearest Neighbors | MIT-BIH Arrhythmia | 99.70 | 97.45 | 99.87 | - | - |
Wang (2021) [8] | PVCs | - | CNN with improved Gated Recurrent Unit network | MIT-BIH Arrhythmia China Physiological Signal Challenge 2018 |
98.30 | 98.40 | 98.20 | - | - |
Meng et al. (2022) [5] | PVC, SPB | - | Lightweight Fussing Transformer with LightConv Attention | The 3rd China Physiological Signal Challenge 2020 | 99.32 | 92.44 | - | - | 93.63 |
Khan et al. (2020) [18] | CVDs | - | SVM | Cleveland Heart Disease dataset from the UCI repository | 93.33 | 94.29 | 92.73 | - | - |
Dami et al. (2021) [63] | CVDs | - | LSTM Deep Belief Network | Four databases: DB1—KAGGLE heart disease dataset|DB2—Shahid Beheshti Hospital Research Center|DB3—Physionet site—Hypertensive patients|DB4—UCI Heart Disease dataset |
88.42 | 85.13 | 85.54 | - | - |
Khan et al. (2020) [64] | CVDs | Custom 1-lead ECG (n.s.) |
Deep Convolutional Neural Network | UCI machine learning repository, Framingham, and Public Health Dataset | 98.20 | 97.80 | 92.80 | - | 95.00 |
Tan et al. (2021) [47] | CVDs and COVID-19 | - | CNN-LSTM | MIT-BIH Arrhythmia | 99.29 | 97.77 | 99.53 | - | - |
Mazumder et al. (2021) [46] | VT and VF | - | CNN-LSTM | MIT-BIH Malignant Ventricular Arrhythmia (VFDB) Creighton University Ventricular Tachycardia (CUDB) |
- | 99.21 | 99.68 | - | - |
Authors (Year) | Specific Application | ECG System (Sampling Frequency) |
AI Algorithm/Method | Database/Dataset | Performance (%) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Acc | Sen | Spe | AUC | F1 | |||||
Gibson et al. (2022) [68] | Myocardial Infarction | - | CNN | Latin America Telemedicine Infarct Network (LATIN) | 90.50 | 86.00 | 94.50 | - | - |
Baloglu et al. (2019) [65] | Myocardial Infarction | - | CNN | PTB ECG: MI on standard 12-lead ECG data | 99.78 | 99.80 | - | - | - |
Cho et al. (2021) [71] | Heart Failure | 12-lead ECG [Page Writer Cardiograph—Philips] (500 Hz) |
Short-time Fourier transform–CNN combination | ECG from multicenter study | 82.50 | 92.10 | 82.10 | 92.90 | - |
Wasimuddin et al. (2021) [19] | Myocardial Infarction | Custom 1-lead ECG (n.s.) |
CNN | European ST-T Custom wearable device |
99.26 | 99.27 | 99.27 | - | - |
Chowdhury et al. (2019) [20] | Myocardial Infarction-Cardiac Arrest | Custom 1-lead ECG (500 Hz) |
Support Vector Machine | MIT-BIH ST Change Normal subjects and an ECG simulator to simulate abnormal ST-elevated MI situations to test the functionality of the complete system in real-time |
97.40 | 99.10 | - | - | 98.70 |
Shahnawaz et al. (2021) [67] | Myocardial Infarction | - | Artificial Neural Network | PTB (PhysioNet) | 99.10 | 100.00 | 98.10 | - | 99.00 |
Sopic, et al. (2018) [66] | Myocardial Infarction | - | Random Forest | PTB (PhysioNet) | 80.30 | 87.95 | 79.63 | - | - |
Martin et al. (2021) [69] | Myocardial Infarction | - | Deep Long Short-Term Memory | PTB-XL and PTB (PhysioNet) | 79.69 | 76.59 | 85.89 | - | 83.42 |
Cao et al. (2021) [70] | Myocardial Infarction | - | Multi-Channel Lightweight model | PTB (PhysioNet) | 96.65 | 94.30 | 97.72 | 96.71 | - |