Advertisement

A New Segmented-Beat Modulation Algorithm for Maternal ECG Estimation from Abdominal Recordings

  • A. Agostinelli
  • C. Giuliani
  • S. Fioretti
  • F. Di Nardo
  • L. Burattini
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering book series (LNEE, volume 392)

Abstract

The noninvasive fetal electrocardiogram (fECG) provides precious information about the physiological fetus state. It is extracted from abdominal recordings, obtained positioning surface electrodes on the maternal abdomen, by subtraction of the maternal ECG (mECG), often roughly estimated by simply concatenating a maternal-beat template. Aim of the present study is to propose a new algorithm for the mECG estimation based on a segmented-beat modulation method (SBMM) that adjusts the template length to the maternal physiological heart-rate variability (HRV) and reduces the level of noise. According to the SBMM, each maternal cardiac cycle (CC) is segmented into two segments, QRS and TUP, respectively independent and proportional to preceding RR interval. The estimated mECG is the concatenation of the template-beat, obtained as the median of the maternal beat after modulation and demodulation of TUP segment. The algorithm was applied to two (ARec1 and ARec2) 4-channel abdominal recordings obtained from pregnant women. ARec1 and ARec2 were both 60 s long and characterized by similar heart rate (HR: 80 bpm and 82 bpm) but different HRV (42 ms vs. 139 ms). Results indicate that the error in the mECG estimation is always small (<2.5 µV) but increases with HRV (ARec1: 0.87–1.65 µV; ARec2: 1.98–2.37 µV). In conclusion, the proposed algorithm based on the SBMM allows a clean mECG estimation from abdominal recordings thanks to a modulation procedure introduced to track physiological variation in the maternal heart rhythm.

References

  1. 1.
    Velayo C, Sato N, Ito T et al (2011) Understanding congenital heart defects through abdominal fetal electrocardiography: case reports and clinical. J Obstet Gynaecol 37:428–435Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hutter D, Kingdom J, Jaeggi E (2010) Causes and mechanisms of intrauterine hypoxia and its impact on the fetal cardiovascular system: a review. Int J Pediatr 2010:1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Regitz-Zagrosek V, Blomstrom-Lundqvist C, Borghi C et al (2001) ESC guidelines on the management of cardiovascular diseases during pregnancy. The task force on the management of cardiovascular diseases during pregnancy of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur Heart J 32:3147–3197Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Agostinelli A, Grillo M, Biagini A et al (2015) Noninvasive fetal electrocardiography: an overview of the signal electrophysiological meaning, recording procedures, and processing techniques. Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol 20:303–313Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hasan M, Reaz M, Ibrahimy MI et al (2009) Detection and processing techniques of FECG signal for fetal monitoring. Biol Proced Online 11:263–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sameni R, Clifford G (2010) A review of fetal ECG signal processing; issues and promising directions. Electrophysiol Ther J 3:4–20Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Agostinelli A, Giuliani C, Di Nardo F et al (2014) Extraction of the fetal ECG in noninvasive recordings using a new method based on segmented-beat modulation. Workshop mBiDa, pp 269–279Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Agostinelli A, Giuliani C, Burattini L (2014) Extracting a clean ECG from a noisy recording: a new method based on segmented-beat modulation. Comput Cardiol 2014(41):49–52Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wolfber AJ (2012) The future of fetal monitoring. Rev Obstet Gynecol 5:132–136Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kriščiukaitis A, Lukoševičius M, Petrolis R et al (2013) Wearable system concept for monitoring of maternal and fetal heart activity. In: 17th international conference biomedical engineering, vol 17, pp 36–40Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hofmeyr GJ, Novikova N (2012) Management of reported decreased fetal movements for improving pregnancy outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 4:1–38Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mangesi L, Hofmeyr GJ, Smith V (2012) Fetal movement counting for assessment of fetal wellbeing (Review). Cochrane Libr 8:1–22Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Goddard R (2001) Electronic fetal monitoring. Brit Med J 322:1436–1437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kotas M, Jezewski J, Matonia A et al (2012) Towards noise immune detection of fetal QRS complexes. Comput Meth Prog Biomed 57:383–394Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Malik M, Hnatkova K, Sisakova M et al (2008) Subject-specific heart rate dependency of electrocardiographic QT, PQ, and QRS intervals. J Electrocardiol 41:491–497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pan J, Tompkins WJ (1985) A real-time QRS detection algorithm. IEEE Trans Bio-Med Eng 32:230–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Agostinelli A, Giuliani C, Di Nardo F et al (2015) The segmented-beat modulation method for ECG estimation. IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2856–2859Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Agostinelli
    • 1
  • C. Giuliani
    • 1
  • S. Fioretti
    • 1
  • F. Di Nardo
    • 1
  • L. Burattini
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Information EngineeringUniversità Politecnica delle MarcheAnconaItaly

Personalised recommendations