By Topic

Model-Based Detection of Heart Rate Turbulence Using Mean Shape Information

Sign In

Cookies must be enabled to login.After enabling cookies , please use refresh or reload or ctrl+f5 on the browser for the login options.

Formats Non-Member Member
$33 $13
Learn how you can qualify for the best price for this item!
Become an IEEE Member or Subscribe to
IEEE Xplore for exclusive pricing!
close button

puzzle piece

IEEE membership options for an individual and IEEE Xplore subscriptions for an organization offer the most affordable access to essential journal articles, conference papers, standards, eBooks, and eLearning courses.

Learn more about:

IEEE membership

IEEE Xplore subscriptions

5 Author(s)
Danny Smith ; Signal Processing Group, Department of Electrical and Information Technology, Lund University, and Center of Integrative Electrocardiology, Lund University (CIEL), Lund, Sweden ; Kristian Solem ; Pablo Laguna ; Juan Pablo MartÍnez
more authors

A generalized likelihood ratio test (GLRT) statistic is proposed for detection of heart rate turbulence (HRT), where a set of Karhunen-LoE¿¿ve basis functions models HRT. The detector structure is based on the extended integral pulse frequency modulation model that accounts for the presence of ectopic beats and HRT. This new test statistic takes a priori information regarding HRT shape into account, whereas our previously presented GLRT detector relied solely on the energy contained in the signal subspace. The spectral relationship between heart rate variability (HRV) and HRT is investigated for the purpose of modeling HRV ¿¿noise¿¿ present during the turbulence period, the results suggesting that the white noise assumption is feasible to pursue. The performance was studied for both simulated and real data, leading to results which show that the new GLRT detector is superior to the original one as well as to the commonly used parameter turbulence slope (TS) on both types of data. Averaging ten ventricular ectopic beats, the estimated detection probability of the new detector, the previous detector, and TS were found to be 0.83, 0.35, and 0.41, respectively, when the false alarm probability was held fixed at 0.1.

Published in:

IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering  (Volume:57 ,  Issue: 2 )