An Improved Method for the Estimation and Visualization of Velocity Fields from Gastric High-Resolution Electrical Mapping

• Published in: IEEE transactions on biomedical engineering 2012-03, Vol.59 (3), p.882-889
• Main Authors: Paskaranandavadivel, Niranchan, OrGrady, Gregory, Du, Peng, Pullan, Andrew J., Cheng, Leo K.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Algorithms; Animals; Applied sciences; Arrays; Detection, estimation, filtering, equalization, prediction; Dysrhythmia; Electrodes; Electrophysiological Phenomena; Estimation; Exact sciences and technology; finite difference (FD); Image processing; Information, signal and communications theory; multielectrode; Muscle Contraction - physiology; Muscle, Smooth - physiology; Noise; polynomial fitting; Polynomials; Propagation; Reliability; Reproducibility of Results; Signal and communications theory; Signal processing; Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted; Signal, noise; slow waves; Stomach - physiology; Swine; Telecommunications and information theory
• ISSN: 0018-9294; 1558-2531
• DOI: 10.1109/TBME.2011.2181845

High-resolution (HR) electrical mapping is an important clinical research tool for understanding normal and abnormal gastric electrophysiology. Analyzing velocities of gastric electrical activity in a reliable and accurate manner can provide additional valuable information for quantitatively and qualitatively comparing features across and within subjects, particularly during gastric dysrhythmias. In this study, we compared three methods of estimating velocities from HR recordings to determine which method was the most reliable for use with gastric HR electrical mapping. The three methods were 1) simple finite difference (FD) 2) smoothed finite difference (FDSM), and 3) a polynomial-based method. With synthetic data, the accuracy of the simple FD method resulted in velocity errors almost twice that of the FDSM and the polynomial-based method, in the presence of activation time error up to 0.5 s. With three synthetic cases under various noise types and levels, the FDSM resulted in average speed error of 3.2% and an average angle error of 2.0 ° and the polynomial-based method had an average speed error of 3.3% and an average angle error of 1.7 ° . With experimental gastric slow wave recordings performed in pigs, the three methods estimated similar velocities (6.3-7.3 mm/s), but the FDSM method had a lower standard deviation in its velocity estimate than the simple FD and the polynomial-based method, leading it to be the method of choice for velocity estimation in gastric slow wave propagation. An improved method for visualizing velocity fields is also presented.