Evaluation of Fetal Distress Diagnosis during Delivery Stages based on Linear and Nonlinear Features of Fetal Heart Rate for Neural Network Community

Cardiotocography (CTG) is a fetal monitoring technique used to determine the distress level of the fetus during pregnancy and delivery. CTG consists of two different signals including fetal heart rate (FHR) and uterine contraction (UC) activities. The linear features of FHR are the most powerful prognostic indices to ascertain whether the fetus in distress. In addition, it is observed that nonlinear features have produced very great results on the time series analysis in recently. In this context, the classification success of the neural network community designed based on the linear and nonlinear features of FHR is analyzed for the delivery process evaluated in three stages. The experimental results have shown that the system designed to distinguish normal and pathological instances is achieved the best classification accuracy at the first stage of the analysis. Also, the greatest contribution of nonlinear features to the classification accuracy is observed at the second stage of the delivery. Consequently, 92.40%, 83.29%, and 79.22% of accuracy obtained for the three stage of the analysis, respectively. General Terms Electronic fetal monitoring, cardiotocography, fetal heart rate, neural networks

[1]  D. Ayres-de-Campos,et al.  FIGO consensus guidelines on intrapartum fetal monitoring: Cardiotocography , 2015, International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics.

[2]  S M Pincus,et al.  Approximate entropy as a measure of system complexity. , 1991, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[3]  Lenka Lhotská,et al.  Using nonlinear features for fetal heart rate classification , 2012, Biomed. Signal Process. Control..

[4]  O. Apantaku,et al.  Review of the first 1502 cases of ECG‐ST waveform analysis during labour in a teaching hospital , 2008, BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[5]  David M. W. Powers,et al.  Evaluation: from precision, recall and F-measure to ROC, informedness, markedness and correlation , 2011, ArXiv.

[6]  Ana Paula Rocha,et al.  Linear and nonlinear analysis of heart rate patterns associated with fetal behavioral states in the antepartum period. , 2007, Early human development.

[7]  I A Basheer,et al.  Artificial neural networks: fundamentals, computing, design, and application. , 2000, Journal of microbiological methods.

[8]  E. Chandraharan,et al.  Continuous cardiotocography during labour: Analysis, classification and management. , 2016, Best practice & research. Clinical obstetrics & gynaecology.

[9]  Zafer Cömert,et al.  Cardiotocography signals with artificial neural network and extreme learning machine , 2016, 2016 24th Signal Processing and Communication Application Conference (SIU).

[10]  Abdulhamit Subasi,et al.  Classification of the cardiotocogram data for anticipation of fetal risks using machine learning techniques , 2015, Appl. Soft Comput..

[11]  R Logier,et al.  Fetal distress diagnosis using heart rate variability analysis: Design of a High Frequency Variability Index , 2008, 2008 30th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[12]  Lenka Lhotská,et al.  Open access intrapartum CTG database , 2014, BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth.

[13]  Abraham Lempel,et al.  On the Complexity of Finite Sequences , 1976, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory.

[14]  Ana Paula Rocha,et al.  Linear and nonlinear fetal heart rate analysis of normal and acidemic fetuses in the minutes preceding delivery , 2006, Medical and Biological Engineering and Computing.

[15]  Jacek M. Leski,et al.  Fuzzy Analysis of Delivery Outcome Attributes for Improving the Automated Fetal State Assessment , 2016, Appl. Artif. Intell..

[16]  Sergio Cerutti,et al.  Linear and nonlinear parameters for the analysisof fetal heart rate signal from cardiotocographic recordings , 2003, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[17]  Zafer Cömert,et al.  Determination of QT interval on synthetic electrocardiogram , 2015, 2015 23nd Signal Processing and Communications Applications Conference (SIU).

[18]  D. Young,et al.  Fetal health surveillance: antepartum and intrapartum consensus guideline. , 2007, Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology Canada : JOGC = Journal d'obstetrique et gynecologie du Canada : JOGC.

[19]  J. Bernardes,et al.  Evaluation of interobserver agreement of cardiotocograms , 1997, International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics.

[20]  Michael G Ross,et al.  The 2008 National Institute of Child Health and Human Development workshop report on electronic fetal monitoring: update on definitions, interpretation, and research guidelines. , 2009, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[21]  G. Breithardt,et al.  Heart rate variability: standards of measurement, physiological interpretation and clinical use. Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology and the North American Society of Pacing and Electrophysiology. , 1996 .

[22]  A. Malliani,et al.  Heart rate variability. Standards of measurement, physiological interpretation, and clinical use , 1996 .

[23]  C. Spong,et al.  The 2008 National Institute of Child Health and Human Development workshop report on electronic fetal monitoring: update on definitions, interpretation, and research guidelines. , 2008, Journal of obstetric, gynecologic, and neonatal nursing : JOGNN.

[24]  A Ugwumadu,et al.  Author response to: Review of the first 1502 cases of ECG‐ST waveform analysis during labour in a teaching hospital , 2007, BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[25]  J. Richman,et al.  Physiological time-series analysis using approximate entropy and sample entropy. , 2000, American journal of physiology. Heart and circulatory physiology.