Cargando…

Is Abdominal Fetal Electrocardiography an Alternative to Doppler Ultrasound for FHR Variability Evaluation?

Great expectations are connected with application of indirect fetal electrocardiography (FECG), especially for home telemonitoring of pregnancy. Evaluation of fetal heart rate (FHR) variability, when determined from FECG, uses the same criteria as for FHR signal acquired classically—through ultrasou...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jezewski, Janusz, Wrobel, Janusz, Matonia, Adam, Horoba, Krzysztof, Martinek, Radek, Kupka, Tomasz, Jezewski, Michal
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5432618/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28559852
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2017.00305
_version_ 1783236670034804736
author Jezewski, Janusz
Wrobel, Janusz
Matonia, Adam
Horoba, Krzysztof
Martinek, Radek
Kupka, Tomasz
Jezewski, Michal
author_facet Jezewski, Janusz
Wrobel, Janusz
Matonia, Adam
Horoba, Krzysztof
Martinek, Radek
Kupka, Tomasz
Jezewski, Michal
author_sort Jezewski, Janusz
collection PubMed
description Great expectations are connected with application of indirect fetal electrocardiography (FECG), especially for home telemonitoring of pregnancy. Evaluation of fetal heart rate (FHR) variability, when determined from FECG, uses the same criteria as for FHR signal acquired classically—through ultrasound Doppler method (US). Therefore, the equivalence of those two methods has to be confirmed, both in terms of recognizing classical FHR patterns: baseline, accelerations/decelerations (A/D), long-term variability (LTV), as well as evaluating the FHR variability with beat-to-beat accuracy—short-term variability (STV). The research material consisted of recordings collected from 60 patients in physiological and complicated pregnancy. The FHR signals of at least 30 min duration were acquired dually, using two systems for fetal and maternal monitoring, based on US and FECG methods. Recordings were retrospectively divided into normal (41) and abnormal (19) fetal outcome. The complex process of data synchronization and validation was performed. Obtained low level of the signal loss (4.5% for US and 1.8% for FECG method) enabled to perform both direct comparison of FHR signals, as well as indirect one—by using clinically relevant parameters. Direct comparison showed that there is no measurement bias between the acquisition methods, whereas the mean absolute difference, important for both visual and computer-aided signal analysis, was equal to 1.2 bpm. Such low differences do not affect the visual assessment of the FHR signal. However, in the indirect comparison the inconsistencies of several percent were noted. This mainly affects the acceleration (7.8%) and particularly deceleration (54%) patterns. In the signals acquired using the electrocardiography the obtained STV and LTV indices have shown significant overestimation by 10 and 50% respectively. It also turned out, that ability of clinical parameters to distinguish between normal and abnormal groups do not depend on the acquisition method. The obtained results prove that the abdominal FECG, considered as an alternative to the ultrasound approach, does not change the interpretation of the FHR signal, which was confirmed during both visual assessment and automated analysis.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5432618
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-54326182017-05-30 Is Abdominal Fetal Electrocardiography an Alternative to Doppler Ultrasound for FHR Variability Evaluation? Jezewski, Janusz Wrobel, Janusz Matonia, Adam Horoba, Krzysztof Martinek, Radek Kupka, Tomasz Jezewski, Michal Front Physiol Physiology Great expectations are connected with application of indirect fetal electrocardiography (FECG), especially for home telemonitoring of pregnancy. Evaluation of fetal heart rate (FHR) variability, when determined from FECG, uses the same criteria as for FHR signal acquired classically—through ultrasound Doppler method (US). Therefore, the equivalence of those two methods has to be confirmed, both in terms of recognizing classical FHR patterns: baseline, accelerations/decelerations (A/D), long-term variability (LTV), as well as evaluating the FHR variability with beat-to-beat accuracy—short-term variability (STV). The research material consisted of recordings collected from 60 patients in physiological and complicated pregnancy. The FHR signals of at least 30 min duration were acquired dually, using two systems for fetal and maternal monitoring, based on US and FECG methods. Recordings were retrospectively divided into normal (41) and abnormal (19) fetal outcome. The complex process of data synchronization and validation was performed. Obtained low level of the signal loss (4.5% for US and 1.8% for FECG method) enabled to perform both direct comparison of FHR signals, as well as indirect one—by using clinically relevant parameters. Direct comparison showed that there is no measurement bias between the acquisition methods, whereas the mean absolute difference, important for both visual and computer-aided signal analysis, was equal to 1.2 bpm. Such low differences do not affect the visual assessment of the FHR signal. However, in the indirect comparison the inconsistencies of several percent were noted. This mainly affects the acceleration (7.8%) and particularly deceleration (54%) patterns. In the signals acquired using the electrocardiography the obtained STV and LTV indices have shown significant overestimation by 10 and 50% respectively. It also turned out, that ability of clinical parameters to distinguish between normal and abnormal groups do not depend on the acquisition method. The obtained results prove that the abdominal FECG, considered as an alternative to the ultrasound approach, does not change the interpretation of the FHR signal, which was confirmed during both visual assessment and automated analysis. Frontiers Media S.A. 2017-05-16 /pmc/articles/PMC5432618/ /pubmed/28559852 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2017.00305 Text en Copyright © 2017 Jezewski, Wrobel, Matonia, Horoba, Martinek, Kupka and Jezewski. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Physiology
Jezewski, Janusz
Wrobel, Janusz
Matonia, Adam
Horoba, Krzysztof
Martinek, Radek
Kupka, Tomasz
Jezewski, Michal
Is Abdominal Fetal Electrocardiography an Alternative to Doppler Ultrasound for FHR Variability Evaluation?
title Is Abdominal Fetal Electrocardiography an Alternative to Doppler Ultrasound for FHR Variability Evaluation?
title_full Is Abdominal Fetal Electrocardiography an Alternative to Doppler Ultrasound for FHR Variability Evaluation?
title_fullStr Is Abdominal Fetal Electrocardiography an Alternative to Doppler Ultrasound for FHR Variability Evaluation?
title_full_unstemmed Is Abdominal Fetal Electrocardiography an Alternative to Doppler Ultrasound for FHR Variability Evaluation?
title_short Is Abdominal Fetal Electrocardiography an Alternative to Doppler Ultrasound for FHR Variability Evaluation?
title_sort is abdominal fetal electrocardiography an alternative to doppler ultrasound for fhr variability evaluation?
topic Physiology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5432618/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28559852
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2017.00305
work_keys_str_mv AT jezewskijanusz isabdominalfetalelectrocardiographyanalternativetodopplerultrasoundforfhrvariabilityevaluation
AT wrobeljanusz isabdominalfetalelectrocardiographyanalternativetodopplerultrasoundforfhrvariabilityevaluation
AT matoniaadam isabdominalfetalelectrocardiographyanalternativetodopplerultrasoundforfhrvariabilityevaluation
AT horobakrzysztof isabdominalfetalelectrocardiographyanalternativetodopplerultrasoundforfhrvariabilityevaluation
AT martinekradek isabdominalfetalelectrocardiographyanalternativetodopplerultrasoundforfhrvariabilityevaluation
AT kupkatomasz isabdominalfetalelectrocardiographyanalternativetodopplerultrasoundforfhrvariabilityevaluation
AT jezewskimichal isabdominalfetalelectrocardiographyanalternativetodopplerultrasoundforfhrvariabilityevaluation