Considerations on Performance Evaluation of Atrial Fibrillation Detectors

Objective: A large number of atrial fibrillation (AF) detectors have been published in recent years, signifying that the comparison of detector performance plays a central role, though not always consistent. The aim of this study is to shed needed light on aspects crucial to the evaluation of detection performance. Methods: Three types of AF detector, using either information on rhythm, rhythm and morphology, or segments of ECG samples, are implemented and studied on both real and simulated ECG signals. The properties of different performance measures are investigated, for example, in relation to dataset imbalance. Results: The results show that performance can differ considerably depending on the way detector output is compared to database annotations, i.e., beat-to-beat, segment-to-segment, or episode-to-episode comparison. Moreover, depending on the type of detector, the results substantiate that physiological and technical factors, e.g., changes in ECG morphology, rate of atrial premature beats, and noise level, can have a considerable influence on performance. Conclusion: The present study demonstrates overall strengths and weaknesses of different types of detector, highlights challenges in AF detection, and proposes five recommendations on how to handle data and characterize performance

Atrial Fibrillation Episode Patterns and Their Influence on Detection Performance

Existing studies offer little insight on how atrial fibrillation (AF) detection performance is influenced by the properties of AF episode patterns. The aim of this study is to investigate the influence of AF burden and median AF episode length on detection performance. For this purpose, three types of AF detectors, using either information on rhythm, rhythm and morphology, or ECG segments, were investigated on 1-h simulated ECGs. Comparing AF burdens of 20% and 80% for a median episode length of 167 beats, the sensitivity of the rhythm- and morphology-based detector increases only slightly whereas the specificity drops from 99.5% to 93.3%. The corresponding figures of specificity are 99.0% and 90.6% for the rhythm-based detector; 88.1% and 70.7% for the segment-based detector. The influence of AF burden on specificity becomes even more pronounced for AF patterns with brief episodes (median episode length set to 30 beats). Therefore, patterns with briefepisodes and high AF burden imply higher demands on detection performance. Future research should focus on how well episode patterns are captured

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 PPGbased 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 contraction