Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics 1/2019

03.05.2019 | Review

Use of artificial intelligence (AI) in the interpretation of intrapartum fetal heart rate (FHR) tracings: a systematic review and meta-analysis

verfasst von: Jacques Balayla, Guy Shrem

Erschienen in: Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics | Ausgabe 1/2019

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Objectives

To determine the degree of inter-rater reliability (IRR) between human and artificial intelligence (AI) interpretation of fetal heart rate tracings (FHR), and to determine whether AI-assisted electronic fetal monitoring interpretation improves neonatal outcomes amongst laboring women.

Data sources

We searched Medline, EMBASE, Google Scholar, Scopus, ISI Web of Science and Cochrane database search, as well as PubMed (www.​pubmed.​gov) and RCT registry (www.​clinicaltrials.​gov) until the end of October 2018 to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing visual and AI interpretation of EFM in labor. Similarly, we sought out all studies evaluating the IRR between AI and expert interpretation of EFM.

Tabulation, integration and results

Weighed mean Cohen’s Kappa was calculated to assess the global IRR. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. We used relative risks (RR) and a random effects (RE) model to calculate weighted estimates. Statistical homogeneity was checked by the χ2 test and I2 using Review Manager 5.3.5 (The Cochrane Collaboration, 2014.) We obtained 201 records, of which 9 met inclusion criteria. Three RCT’s were used to compare the neonatal outcomes and 6 cohort studies were used to establish the degree of IRR between both approaches of EFM evaluation. With regards to the neonatal outcomes, a total of 55,064 patients were included in the analysis. Relative to the use of clinical (visual) evaluation of the FHR, the use of AI did not change the incidence rates of neonatal acidosis, cord pH below < 7.20, 5-min APGAR scores < 7, mode of delivery, NICU admission, neonatal seizures, or perinatal death. With regards to the degrees of inter-rater reliability, a weighed mean Cohen’s Kappa of 0.49 [0.32–0.66] indicates moderate agreement between expert observers and computerized systems.

Conclusion

The use of AI and computer analysis for the interpretation of EFM during labor does not improve neonatal outcomes. Inter-rater reliability between experts and computer systems is moderate at best. Future studies should aim at further elucidating these findings.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Verghese A, Shah NH, Harrington RA (2018) What this computer needs is a physician: humanism and artificial intelligence. JAMA 319(1):19–20CrossRefPubMed Verghese A, Shah NH, Harrington RA (2018) What this computer needs is a physician: humanism and artificial intelligence. JAMA 319(1):19–20CrossRefPubMed
2.
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Macones GA et al (2008) The 2008 National Institute of Child Health and Human Development workshop report on electronic fetal monitoring: update on definitions, interpretation, and research guidelines. Obstet Gynecol 112(3):661–666CrossRefPubMed Macones GA et al (2008) The 2008 National Institute of Child Health and Human Development workshop report on electronic fetal monitoring: update on definitions, interpretation, and research guidelines. Obstet Gynecol 112(3):661–666CrossRefPubMed
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Jauniaux E, Prefumo F (2016) Fetal heart monitoring in labour: from pinard to artificial intelligence. BJOG 123(6):870CrossRefPubMed Jauniaux E, Prefumo F (2016) Fetal heart monitoring in labour: from pinard to artificial intelligence. BJOG 123(6):870CrossRefPubMed
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Lear CA et al (2016) The myths and physiology surrounding intrapartum decelerations: the critical role of the peripheral chemoreflex. J Physiol 594(17):4711–4725CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Lear CA et al (2016) The myths and physiology surrounding intrapartum decelerations: the critical role of the peripheral chemoreflex. J Physiol 594(17):4711–4725CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Liston R, Sawchuck D, Young D (2018) No. 197b-Fetal health surveillance: intrapartum consensus guideline. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 40(4):e298–e322CrossRefPubMed Liston R, Sawchuck D, Young D (2018) No. 197b-Fetal health surveillance: intrapartum consensus guideline. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 40(4):e298–e322CrossRefPubMed
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Alfirevic Z et al (2017) Continuous cardiotocography (CTG) as a form of electronic fetal monitoring (EFM) for fetal assessment during labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2:CD006066PubMed Alfirevic Z et al (2017) Continuous cardiotocography (CTG) as a form of electronic fetal monitoring (EFM) for fetal assessment during labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2:CD006066PubMed
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Group, I.C. (2017) Computerised interpretation of fetal heart rate during labour (INFANT): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 389(10080):1719–1729CrossRef Group, I.C. (2017) Computerised interpretation of fetal heart rate during labour (INFANT): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 389(10080):1719–1729CrossRef
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Ignatov PN, Lutomski JE (2016) Quantitative cardiotocography to improve fetal assessment during labor: a preliminary randomized controlled trial. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 205:91–97CrossRefPubMed Ignatov PN, Lutomski JE (2016) Quantitative cardiotocography to improve fetal assessment during labor: a preliminary randomized controlled trial. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 205:91–97CrossRefPubMed
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Nunes I et al (2017) Central fetal monitoring with and without computer analysis: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 129(1):83–90CrossRefPubMed Nunes I et al (2017) Central fetal monitoring with and without computer analysis: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 129(1):83–90CrossRefPubMed
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Sun S (2011) Meta-analysis of Cohen’s kappa. Health Serv Outcomes Res Method 11(3–4):145–163CrossRef Sun S (2011) Meta-analysis of Cohen’s kappa. Health Serv Outcomes Res Method 11(3–4):145–163CrossRef
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Jackson M et al (2011) Frequency of fetal heart rate categories and short-term neonatal outcome. Obstet Gynecol 118(4):803–808CrossRefPubMed Jackson M et al (2011) Frequency of fetal heart rate categories and short-term neonatal outcome. Obstet Gynecol 118(4):803–808CrossRefPubMed
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Fairley S, Lawson H, Morris K (2000) Inter-observer agreement in cardiotocogram interpretation: how reliable is Ontario? J SOGC 22(5):366–373CrossRef Fairley S, Lawson H, Morris K (2000) Inter-observer agreement in cardiotocogram interpretation: how reliable is Ontario? J SOGC 22(5):366–373CrossRef
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Donker DK, van Geijn HP, Hasman A (1993) Interobserver variation in the assessment of fetal heart rate recordings. Eur J Obstet Gynecol 52(1):21–28CrossRef Donker DK, van Geijn HP, Hasman A (1993) Interobserver variation in the assessment of fetal heart rate recordings. Eur J Obstet Gynecol 52(1):21–28CrossRef
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Parer JT et al (2006) Fetal acidemia and electronic fetal heart rate patterns: is there evidence of an association? J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 19(5):289–294CrossRefPubMed Parer JT et al (2006) Fetal acidemia and electronic fetal heart rate patterns: is there evidence of an association? J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 19(5):289–294CrossRefPubMed
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Akselrod S et al (1981) Power spectrum analysis of heart rate fluctuation: a quantitative probe of beat-to-beat cardiovascular control. Science 213(4504):220–222CrossRefPubMed Akselrod S et al (1981) Power spectrum analysis of heart rate fluctuation: a quantitative probe of beat-to-beat cardiovascular control. Science 213(4504):220–222CrossRefPubMed
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Parer JT, Hamilton EF (2010) Comparison of 5 experts and computer analysis in rule-based fetal heart rate interpretation. Am J Obstet Gynecol 203(5):451 (e1-7) CrossRefPubMed Parer JT, Hamilton EF (2010) Comparison of 5 experts and computer analysis in rule-based fetal heart rate interpretation. Am J Obstet Gynecol 203(5):451 (e1-7) CrossRefPubMed
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Devoe L et al (2000) A comparison of visual analyses of intrapartum fetal heart rate tracings according to the new national institute of child health and human development guidelines with computer analyses by an automated fetal heart rate monitoring system. Am J Obstet Gynecol 183(2):361–366CrossRefPubMed Devoe L et al (2000) A comparison of visual analyses of intrapartum fetal heart rate tracings according to the new national institute of child health and human development guidelines with computer analyses by an automated fetal heart rate monitoring system. Am J Obstet Gynecol 183(2):361–366CrossRefPubMed
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Bracero LA, Roshanfekr D, Byrne DW (2000) Analysis of antepartum fetal heart rate tracing by physician and computer. J Maternal Fetal Med 9(3):181–185 Bracero LA, Roshanfekr D, Byrne DW (2000) Analysis of antepartum fetal heart rate tracing by physician and computer. J Maternal Fetal Med 9(3):181–185
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Costa MA et al (2010) Comparison of a computer system evaluation of intrapartum cardiotocographic events and a consensus of clinicians. J Perinat Med 38(2):191–195CrossRefPubMed Costa MA et al (2010) Comparison of a computer system evaluation of intrapartum cardiotocographic events and a consensus of clinicians. J Perinat Med 38(2):191–195CrossRefPubMed
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Krupa N et al (2011) Antepartum fetal heart rate feature extraction and classification using empirical mode decomposition and support vector machine. Biomed Eng Online 10:6CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Krupa N et al (2011) Antepartum fetal heart rate feature extraction and classification using empirical mode decomposition and support vector machine. Biomed Eng Online 10:6CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
23.
Metadaten
Titel
Use of artificial intelligence (AI) in the interpretation of intrapartum fetal heart rate (FHR) tracings: a systematic review and meta-analysis
verfasst von
Jacques Balayla
Guy Shrem
Publikationsdatum
03.05.2019
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics / Ausgabe 1/2019
Print ISSN: 0932-0067
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-0711
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-019-05151-7

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2019

Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics 1/2019 Zur Ausgabe

Hirsutismus bei PCOS: Laser- und Lichttherapien helfen

26.04.2024 Hirsutismus Nachrichten

Laser- und Lichtbehandlungen können bei Frauen mit polyzystischem Ovarialsyndrom (PCOS) den übermäßigen Haarwuchs verringern und das Wohlbefinden verbessern – bei alleiniger Anwendung oder in Kombination mit Medikamenten.

ICI-Therapie in der Schwangerschaft wird gut toleriert

Müssen sich Schwangere einer Krebstherapie unterziehen, rufen Immuncheckpointinhibitoren offenbar nicht mehr unerwünschte Wirkungen hervor als andere Mittel gegen Krebs.

Weniger postpartale Depressionen nach Esketamin-Einmalgabe

Bislang gibt es kein Medikament zur Prävention von Wochenbettdepressionen. Das Injektionsanästhetikum Esketamin könnte womöglich diese Lücke füllen.

Bei RSV-Impfung vor 60. Lebensjahr über Off-Label-Gebrauch aufklären!

22.04.2024 DGIM 2024 Kongressbericht

Durch die Häufung nach der COVID-19-Pandemie sind Infektionen mit dem Respiratorischen Synzytial-Virus (RSV) in den Fokus gerückt. Fachgesellschaften empfehlen eine Impfung inzwischen nicht nur für Säuglinge und Kleinkinder.

Update Gynäkologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert – ganz bequem per eMail.