A deep neural network for 12-lead electrocardiogram interpretation outperforms a conventional algorithm, and its physician overread, in the diagnosis of atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Automated electrocardiogram (ECG) interpretations may be erroneous, and lead to erroneous overreads, including for atrial fibrillation (AF). We compared the accuracy of the first version of a new deep neural network 12-Lead ECG algorithm (Cardiologs®) to the conventional Veritas algorithm in interpretation of AF. METHODS: 24,123 consecutive 12-lead ECGs recorded over 6 months were interpreted by 1) the Veritas® algorithm, 2) physicians who overread Veritas® (Veritas®â€¯+ physician), and 3) Cardiologs® algorithm. We randomly selected 500 out of 858 ECGs with a diagnosis of AF according to either algorithm, then compared the algorithms' interpretations, and Veritas®â€¯+ physician, with expert interpretation. To assess sensitivity for AF, we analyzed a separate database of 1473 randomly selected ECGs interpreted by both algorithms and by blinded experts. RESULTS: Among the 500 ECGs selected, 399 had a final classification of AF; 101 (20.2%) had ≥1 false positive automated interpretation. Accuracy of Cardiologs® (91.2%; CI: 82.4-94.4) was higher than Veritas® (80.2%; CI: 76.5-83.5) (p < 0.0001), and equal to Veritas®â€¯+ physician (90.0%, CI:87.1-92.3) (p = 0.12). When Veritas® was incorrect, accuracy of Veritas®â€¯+ physician was only 62% (CI 52-71); among those ECGs, Cardiologs® accuracy was 90% (CI: 82-94; p < 0.0001). The second database had 39 AF cases; sensitivity was 92% vs. 87% (p = 0.46) and specificity was 99.5% vs. 98.7% (p = 0.03) for Cardiologs® and Veritas® respectively. CONCLUSION: Cardiologs® 12-lead ECG algorithm improves the interpretation of atrial fibrillation.

A deep neural network learning algorithm outperforms a conventional algorithm for emergency department electrocardiogram interpretation.

BACKGROUND: Cardiologs® has developed the first electrocardiogram (ECG) algorithm that uses a deep neural network (DNN) for full 12­lead ECG analysis, including rhythm, QRS and ST-T-U waves. We compared the accuracy of the first version of Cardiologs® DNN algorithm to the Mortara/Veritas® conventional algorithm in emergency department (ED) ECGs. METHODS: Individual ECG diagnoses were prospectively mapped to one of 16 pre-specified groups of ECG diagnoses, which were further classified as "major" ECG abnormality or not. Automated interpretations were compared to blinded experts'. The primary outcome was the performance of the algorithms in finding at least one "major" abnormality. The secondary outcome was the proportion of all ECGs for which all groups were identified, with no false negative or false positive groups ("accurate ECG interpretation"). Additionally, we measured sensitivity and positive predictive value (PPV) for any abnormal group. RESULTS: Cardiologs® vs. Veritas® accuracy for finding a major abnormality was 92.2% vs. 87.2% (p < 0.0001), with comparable sensitivity (88.7% vs. 92.0%, p = 0.086), improved specificity (94.0% vs. 84.7%, p < 0.0001) and improved positive predictive value (PPV 88.2% vs. 75.4%, p < 0.0001). Cardiologs® had accurate ECG interpretation for 72.0% (95% CI: 69.6-74.2) of ECGs vs. 59.8% (57.3-62.3) for Veritas® (P < 0.0001). Sensitivity for any abnormal group for Cardiologs® and Veritas®, respectively, was 69.6% (95CI 66.7-72.3) vs. 68.3% (95CI 65.3-71.1) (NS). Positive Predictive Value was 74.0% (71.1-76.7) for Cardiologs® vs. 56.5% (53.7-59.3) for Veritas® (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Cardiologs' DNN was more accurate and specific in identifying ECGs with at least one major abnormal group. It had a significantly higher rate of accurate ECG interpretation, with similar sensitivity and higher PPV.