PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Gupta, Amulya
AU  - Harvey, Christopher J.
AU  - DeBauge, Ashley
AU  - Shomaji, Sumaiya
AU  - Yao, Zijun
AU  - Noheria, Amit
TI  - Machine learning to classify left ventricular hypertrophy using ECG feature extraction by variational autoencoder
AID  - 10.1101/2024.10.14.24315460
DP  - 2024 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2024.10.14.24315460
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/10/15/2024.10.14.24315460.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/10/15/2024.10.14.24315460.full
AB  - Background Traditional ECG criteria for left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) have low diagnostic yield. Machine learning (ML) can improve ECG classification.Methods ECG summary features (rate, intervals, axis), R-wave, S-wave and overall-QRS amplitudes, and QRS/QRST voltage-time integrals (VTIs) were extracted from 12-lead, vectorcardiographic X-Y-Z-lead, and root-mean-square (3D) representative-beat ECGs. Latent features were extracted by variational autoencoder from X-Y-Z and 3D representative-beat ECGs. Logistic regression, random forest, light gradient boosted machine (LGBM), residual network (ResNet) and multilayer perceptron network (MLP) models using ECG features and sex, and a convolutional neural network (CNN) using ECG signals, were trained to predict LVH (left ventricular mass indexed in women >95 g/m², men >115 g/m²) on 225,333 adult ECG-echocardiogram (within 45 days) pairs. AUROCs for LVH classification were obtained in a separate test set for individual ECG variables, traditional criteria and ML models.Results In the test set (n=25,263), AUROC for LVH classification was higher for ML models using ECG features (LGBM 0.790, MLP 0.789, ResNet 0.788) as compared to the best individual variable (VTIQRS-3D 0.677), the best traditional criterion (Cornell voltage-duration product 0.647) and CNN using ECG signal (0.767). Among patients without LVH who had a follow-up echocardiogram >1 (closest to 5) years later, LGBM false positives, compared to true negatives, had a 2.63 (95% CI 2.01, 3.45)-fold higher risk for developing LVH (p<0.0001).Conclusions ML models are superior to traditional ECG criteria to classify—and predict future—LVH. Models trained on extracted ECG features, including variational autoencoder latent variables, outperformed CNN directly trained on ECG signal.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementResearch reported in this publication was supported by the KUMC Research Institute. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the KUMC Research Institute. This work was supported by a CTSA grant from NCATS awarded to the University of Kansas for Frontiers: University of Kansas Clinical and Translational Science Institute (# UL1TR002366) The contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH or NCATS.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Ethics committee/IRB of University of Kansas Medical Center gave ethical approval for this work.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesThe data supporting findings of this study were obtained from our institutional database that contains identifiable patient information. Access to the data is restricted and subject to approval by the institutional review board. Researchers interested in accessing the data may contact the corresponding author for information about the necessary procedures and approvals required.ECGelectrocardiogramLVHleft ventricular hypertrophyMLmachine learningAIartificial intelligenceMLPmultilayered perceptronLGBMlight gradient-boosting machineAUROCarea under the receiver operator characteristic curveVAEvariational AutoencoderLVMileft ventricular mass indexed