High Specificity Wearable Device With Photoplethysmography and Six-Lead Electrocardiography for Atrial Fibrillation Detection Challenged by Frequent Premature Contractions: DoubleCheck-AF

Background: Consumer smartwatches have gained attention as mobile health (mHealth) tools able to detect atrial fibrillation (AF) using photoplethysmography (PPG) or a short strip of electrocardiogram (ECG). PPG has limited accuracy due to the movement artifacts, whereas ECG cannot be used continuously, is usually displayed as a single-lead signal and is limited in asymptomatic cases.
Objective: DoubleCheck-AF is a validation study of a wrist-worn device dedicated to providing both continuous PPG-based rhythm monitoring and instant 6-lead ECG with no wires. We evaluated its ability to differentiate between AF and sinus rhythm (SR) with particular emphasis on the challenge of frequent premature beats.
Methods and Results: We performed a prospective, non-randomized study of 344 participants including 121 patients in AF. To challenge the specificity of the device two control groups were selected: 95 patients in stable SR and 128 patients in SR with frequent premature ventricular or atrial contractions (PVCs/PACs). All ECG tracings were labeled by two independent diagnosis-blinded cardiologists as “AF,” “SR” or “Cannot be concluded.” In case of disagreement, a third cardiologist was consulted. A simultaneously recorded ECG of Holter monitor served as a reference. It revealed a high burden of ectopy in the corresponding control group: 6.2 PVCs/PACs per minute, bigeminy/trigeminy episodes in 24.2% (31/128) and runs of ≥3 beats in 9.4% (12/128) of patients. AF detection with PPG-based algorithm, ECG of the wearable and combination of both yielded sensitivity and specificity of 94.2 and 96.9%; 99.2 and 99.1%; 94.2 and 99.6%, respectively. All seven false-positive PPG-based cases were from the frequent PVCs/PACs group compared to none from the stable SR group (P < 0.001). In the majority of these cases (6/7) cardiologists were able to correct the diagnosis to SR with the help of the ECG of the device (P = 0.012).
Conclusions: This is the first wearable combining PPG-based AF detection algorithm for screening of AF together with an instant 6-lead ECG with no wires for manual rhythm confirmation. The system maintained high specificity despite a remarkable amount of frequent single or multiple premature contractions.
Introduction
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is closely associated with an ageing population and its prevalence is expected to double by 2060 to 17.9 million in the European Union alone (1). Consequently, the burden of thromboembolic events, heart failure, bleeding and other major implications may arise. Health care resources must adapt to large-scale early diagnosis and individualized state-of-the-art treatment. To comply with it, the European Society of Cardiology upgraded the recommendation class for systematic electrocardiography (ECG) screening to detect AF in individuals aged ≥75 years, or those at high risk of stroke from ‘may be considered’ (class IIb) to ‘should be considered’ (class IIa) (2). Opportunistic screening for AF by pulse taking or ECG rhythm strip in patients ≥65 years of age remains ‘recommended’ (class I). The problem of insufficient examination for AF is also relevant to secondary prevention. As revealed by an international survey, in 40% of European countries only conventional ECG without long-term cardiac monitoring is the most common method to exclude AF after transient ischemic attack (3).
Accelerated by the Covid-19 pandemic (4) new wearable technologies have the potential to expand the availability of medical care (5, 6), reduce health inequities in remote areas (7) and integrate into the workflow of dedicated AF teams (8). However, clinicians need to assess the cost-effectiveness, regulatory approval, specific clinical applications, patient expectations, data logistics and other issues of each mobile health (mHealth) tool (9). As implied by the World Health Organization, the cost of finding a case (including the diagnosis and the treatment of the diagnosed) should be economically balanced in relation to possible expenditure on medical care as a whole (10). We are convinced that major real-world flaws of wearables are driven by false-positive cases, which require numerous additional resources.
In the DoubleCheck-AF study we present a wrist-worn device dedicated to providing both extensive photoplethysmography-based (PPG) rhythm monitoring and reliable decision establishment with a wearable 6-lead limb-like ECG. The aim of this paper was to evaluate whether the described system has an acceptable ability to differentiate between AF and sinus rhythm (SR) when challenged by a substantial group of patients with premature ventricular or atrial contractions (PVCs/PACs), that are often underestimated in clinical trials.
Materials and Methods
Study Design and Recruitment
DoubleCheck-AF is a single-center, non-randomized validation study with a prospective case-control model. It was carried out in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. A regional bioethics committee approved the study with registration No. 158200-18/7-1052-557. All enrolled patients provided a written informed consent. The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04281927).
Patients were recruited from inpatient and outpatient wards of Cardiology Department at Vilnius University Hospital Santaros Klinikos. Inclusion criteria were adult patients (18 to 99 years) with a current ECG-based diagnosis of AF, sinus rhythm (SR) or SR with frequent PVCs/PACs (at least one ectopic beat in 2 min). Subjects with a regular pulse wave despite AF (e.g., paced ventricular beats) or with other arrhythmia as well as those who refused to sign or could not give an informed consent were excluded.
Measurements
The wrist-worn device integrates two types of sensors: PPG for continuous screening of AF and on-demand 6-lead ECG with no wires for rhythm confirmation (Figure 1).
FIGURE 1
Figure 1. Prototype of the wearable device (left panel); acquiring of 6-lead ECG without any wires (right panel).
The automatic PPG-based algorithm indicates whether AF is suspected as described previously (11, 12). An embedded PPG sensor uses a green light-emitting diode and a photodetector to continuously measure changes in blood flow. The algorithm relies on the analysis of peak-to-peak intervals, extracted using an adaptive threshold for peak detection. The AF detector has several solutions to reduce the false alarm rate, including filtering of ectopic beats, bigeminy suppression, sinus arrhythmia suppression and continuous signal quality assessment. The latter analyses each detected PPG pulse, identifies artifacts and enables reliable long-term monitoring for AF. The algorithm for AF detection is flexible with respect to the briefest duration of possible AF episode (12). In this study, the algorithm was tuned to detect as short AF episodes as 30 s, accounting to the clinical definition of the minimal duration of paroxysmal AF. Therefore, the PPG-based algorithm triggers the AF alarm after an average duration of 30 s in AF if the condition of sufficient signal quality index is met (11). It should be noted that the duration from the onset of AF to the alarm may vary depending on the heart rate irregularity. That is, the alarm can be triggered as soon as after 5 s in case of highly irregular AF, but no later than after 1 min in case of AF with very low irregularity of heartbeats. Once the PPG-based algorithm detects a possible AF episode, it triggers a vibration alarm for the user.
Following the alarm notification, a wearable 6-lead ECG is acquired (Figure 2). During our study, even if no notification occurred in at least 1 min of wearing it, an ECG was recorded as well to confirm the rhythm and investigate the method.
FIGURE 2
Figure 2. The 6-lead ECGs recorded by the wearable device with the examples of atrial fibrillation (top left panel); stable sinus rhythm (SR) (top right panel); SR with frequent premature ventricular contractions (lower left panel); SR with frequent premature atrial contractions (lower right panel).
The device has three electrodes: two on the outer surface and one on the inner surface next to the PPG sensor (Figure 1). The wearable ECG was recorded by touching one electrode on the upper surface with the right index finger and holding another electrode on the left upper abdomen under the rib cage (Figure 1). In this way, the Einthoven leads I and II were measured. The lead III was calculated according to Kirchhoff’s law. Goldberger augmented limb leads aVR, aVL and aVF were also calculated from the measured leads. ECG strips were registered at the intervals of contact between the electrodes and the patient’s body. The sudden drop in bioimpedance recorded in a separate channel helped to detect ECG recording events in the continuous multichannel signal. All signals were recorded in a file within the internal memory of the device using a secure GDF (General Data Format) (13). Manual ECG rhythm assessment was performed using dedicated software based on the presence or absence of P-waves and the regularity of QRS complexes.
Diagnostic measures of both PPG-based and wearable ECG-based AF detection methods were calculated separately. Alternatively, the methods were also evaluated together as a “double-check” system for detection of AF. In the latter strategy an embedded PPG-based detector ensures continuous monitoring for AF episodes. If it suspects AF and alarms the patient, only then a matched wearable 6-lead ECG is included in further data analysis for diagnosis confirmation. Such approach does not correct false-negative cases of the PPG algorithm, i.e., sensitivity, but may add great value in reducing the number of false-positive cases of the PPG algorithm, i.e., improving specificity.
All participants used the wearable to record at least a total of 2 min of PPG and 2 min of 6-lead standard-limb-like ECG. In addition, each subject was simultaneously monitored with a validated ECG Holter monitor (eMotion Faros, Kuopio, Finland), which recorded a continuous 3-lead ECG. The ECG of Holter monitor served as a gold standard test for cardiologists to verify the heart rhythm and provide a comparable reference to the PPG-based algorithm and wearable 6-lead ECG of the studied device.
Data Analysis
Two independent diagnosis-blinded cardiologists labeled all ECG tracings as “AF,” “SR” or “Cannot be concluded.” In case of disagreement, a third diagnosis-blinded cardiologist was consulted. The ECG tracings of the studied device and the gold standard Holter have a different number of leads (I, II, III, aVR, aVL, aVF – like vs. three leads, respectively). Therefore, they were presented to cardiologists as separate data sets rather than merged into one. Continuous variables were reported as mean with standard deviation or median with interquartile range. Categorical variables were presented as counts and percentages. For diagnostic performance evaluation we applied standard measures such as sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive likelihood ratio and negative likelihood ratio. Due to the great dependence on the prevalence of disease, positive or negative predictive values were not evaluated. An independent sample Student’s T-test or Mann-Whitney U test was applied to quantitative data. When the expected values in any of the cells of a contingency table were ≥5, a Chi-square test was applied for categorical data. Otherwise, a two-tailed Fisher’s exact test was selected. Cramer’s V was used to measure the association between results of investigated diagnostic methods and reference. Data was processed using the statistical package for the social sciences (27.0, SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA).
Results
A total of 435 patients were assessed for eligibility in a single center between March 2019 and September 2019. As presented in detail (Figure 3), we excluded 15 subjects due to logistical errors (duplicates or missing data files). After the initial analysis of PPG tracings, 8 patients were excluded due to missing PPG signals and 13 due to insufficient PPG quality. Regarding the wearable ECG method, we excluded 11 subjects due to missing ECG signals and 43 due to insufficient ECG quality. One patient was excluded due to typical atrial flutter instead of AF. Therefore, the final sample size constituted 344 patients. Our analysis included 121 patients with AF, predominantly paroxysmal, 95 patients with stable SR and 128 patients with SR and frequent premature contractions (Table 1). The latter group consisted of individuals with dominant PVCs (n = 88) or PACs (n = 40). To meet a threshold for a sufficient frequency of at least one extrasystole per 2 min, a Holter ECG of validated device was thoroughly examined. The real burden of PVCs/PACs exceeded the threshold to a large extent and comprised a median of 6.2 (16.1–2.8) premature beats per minute. Importantly, almost a quarter of this group (31/128, 24.2%) had episodes of bigeminy or trigeminy and almost a one-tenth (12/128, 9.4%) had runs of ≥3 PACs/PVCs which were often irregular (Figure 4). The mentioned arrhythmogenicity parameters reflect the significant pressure we have put on both the PPG algorithm and the ECG of the device to differentiate between SR and AF.
FIGURE 3
Figure 3. Flow chart of patients. AF, atrial fibrillation; SR, sinus rhythm; PVC, premature ventricular contraction; PAC, premature atrial contraction; ECG, electrocardiography; PPG, photoplethysmography.
Article by, https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/cardiovascular-medicine/articles/10.3389/fcvm.2022.869730/full