Identifying Risk of Adverse Outcomes in COVID-19 Patients via Artificial Intelligence-Powered Analysis of 12-Lead Intake Electrocardiogram
Background: Adverse events in COVID-19 are difficult to predict. Risk stratification is encumbered by the need to protect healthcare workers. We hypothesize that AI can help identify subtle signs of myocardial involvement in the 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG), which could help predict complications...
Gespeichert in:
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext bestellen |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Background: Adverse events in COVID-19 are difficult to predict. Risk stratification is encumbered by the need to protect healthcare workers. We hypothesize that AI can help identify subtle signs of myocardial involvement in the 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG), which could help predict complications. Objective: Use intake ECGs from COVID-19 patients to train AI models to predict risk of mortality or major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Methods: We studied intake ECGs from 1448 COVID-19 patients (60.5% male, 63.4±16.9 years). Records were labeled by mortality (death vs. discharge) or MACE (no events vs. arrhythmic, heart failure [HF], or thromboembolic [TE] events), then used to train AI models; these were compared to conventional regression models developed using demographic and comorbidity data. Results: 245 (17.7%) patients died (67.3% male, 74.5±14.4 years); 352 (24.4%) experienced at least one MACE (119 arrhythmic; 107 HF; 130 TE). AI models predicted mortality and MACE with area under the curve (AUC) values of 0.60±0.05 and 0.55±0.07, respectively; these were comparable to AUC values for conventional models (0.73±0.07 and 0.65±0.10). There were no prominent temporal trends in mortality rate or MACE incidence in our cohort; holdout testing with data from after a cutoff date (June 9, 2020) did not degrade model performance. Conclusion: Using intake ECGs alone, our AI models had limited ability to predict hospitalized COVID-19 patients' risk of mortality or MACE. Our models' accuracy was comparable to that of conventional models built using more in-depth information, but translation to clinical use would require higher sensitivity and positive predictive value. In the future, we hope that mixed-input AI models utilizing both ECG and clinical data may be developed to enhance predictive accuracy. |
---|---|
DOI: | 10.1016/j.cvdhj.2021.12.003 |