Is abdominal fetal electrocardiography an alternative to doppler ultrasound for FHR variability evaluation?
dc.contributor.author | Jeżewski, Janusz | |
dc.contributor.author | Wróbel, Janusz | |
dc.contributor.author | Matonia, Adam | |
dc.contributor.author | Horoba, Krzysztof | |
dc.contributor.author | Martinek, Radek | |
dc.contributor.author | Kupka, Tomasz | |
dc.contributor.author | Jeżewski, Michał | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2017-07-03T09:57:24Z | |
dc.date.available | 2017-07-03T09:57:24Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2017 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Frontiers in Physiology. 2017, vol. 8, art. no. 305. | cs |
dc.identifier.issn | 1664-042X | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10084/117160 | |
dc.description.abstract | 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. | cs |
dc.format.extent | 1702138 bytes | |
dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | |
dc.language.iso | en | cs |
dc.publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. | cs |
dc.relation.ispartofseries | Frontiers in Physiology | cs |
dc.relation.uri | https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2017.00305 | cs |
dc.rights | © 2017 Jezewski, Wrobel, Matonia, Horoba, Martinek, Kupka and Jezewski. 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. | cs |
dc.rights.uri | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ | cs |
dc.subject | Doppler ultrasound | cs |
dc.subject | fetal electrocardiogram | cs |
dc.subject | fetal heart rate analysis | cs |
dc.subject | fetal state assessment | cs |
dc.subject | fetal outcome | cs |
dc.title | Is abdominal fetal electrocardiography an alternative to doppler ultrasound for FHR variability evaluation? | cs |
dc.type | article | cs |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.3389/fphys.2017.00305 | |
dc.rights.access | openAccess | |
dc.type.version | publishedVersion | cs |
dc.type.status | Peer-reviewed | cs |
dc.description.source | Web of Science | cs |
dc.description.volume | 8 | cs |
dc.description.firstpage | art. no. 305 | cs |
dc.identifier.wos | 000403252900001 |
Soubory tohoto záznamu
Tento záznam se objevuje v následujících kolekcích
-
Publikační činnost VŠB-TUO ve Web of Science / Publications of VŠB-TUO in Web of Science [7798]
Kolekce obsahuje bibliografické záznamy článků akademických pracovníků VŠB-TUO publikovaných v časopisech indexovaných ve Web of Science od roku 1990 po současnost. -
OpenAIRE [5085]
Kolekce určená pro sklízení infrastrukturou OpenAIRE; obsahuje otevřeně přístupné publikace, případně další publikace, které jsou výsledkem projektů rámcových programů Evropské komise (7. RP, H2020, Horizon Europe). -
Články z časopisů s impakt faktorem / Articles from Impact Factor Journals [6377]
Články z časopisů (od roku 2008), které v době vydání článku měly impakt faktor. -
Publikační činnost Katedry kybernetiky a biomedicínského inženýrství / Publications of Department of Cybernetics and Biomedical Engineering (450) [396]
Kolekce obsahuje bibliografické záznamy publikační činnosti (článků) akademických pracovníků Katedry kybernetiky a biomedicínského inženýrství (450) v časopisech a v Lecture Notes in Computer Science registrovaných ve Web of Science od roku 2003 po současnost.
Kromě případů, kde je uvedeno jinak, licence tohoto záznamu je © 2017 Jezewski, Wrobel, Matonia, Horoba, Martinek, Kupka and Jezewski. 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.