PulseAI detected arterial waveform fiducial points with errors ≤12.6 ms and AIx correlated strongly (r=0.990) with arterial stiffness in single-site cuff measures.
Does PulseAI accurately detect fiducial points on brachial cuff waveforms for single-site assessment of arterial stiffness compared to human annotation?
145 heterogeneous subjects providing 5,215 brachial cuff waveforms
PulseAI (multi-channel convolutional neural network for automated fiducial point detection)
Human-annotated labels
Fiducial point predictions accuracy (inflection point, ti, and dicrotic notch, tn) and downstream pulse waveform analysis (PWA) metricssurrogate
PulseAI enables accurate, automated, single-site monitoring of arterial stiffness from brachial cuff waveforms, matching human-annotated labels.
• Arterial stiffness is clinically valuable, but complex to assess routinely. • PulseAI reliably detects fiducial points across diverse waveform morphologies. • Spectral machine learning achieves comparable performance with lower complexity. • AIx derived from PulseAI correlates with arterial stiffness assessed via PTT. • PulseAI enables automated, single-site arterial stiffness monitoring. Arterial stiffness is a fundamental characteristic of circulatory physiology and a well-established predictor of cardiovascular risk and mortality. However, routine clinical assessment remains limited by the need for dual-site measurements. To address this challenge, we developed a machine learning algorithm – PulseAI – for automated fiducial point detection on brachial cuff waveforms for single-site assessment of arterial stiffness. PulseAI was trained and evaluated using a clinical dataset comprising 5,215 waveforms from 145 heterogeneous subjects. Performance was assessed on fiducial point predictions accuracy (inflection point, t i , and dicrotic notch, t n ) and downstream pulse waveform analysis (PWA) metrics. Our multi-channel convolutional neural network (PulseAI) reported a median IQR on mean absolute error for fiducial point detection of 5 3, 10 ms. PulseAI demonstrated high accuracy in predicting t i (r = 0.913, p < 0.0001) and t n (r = 0.939, p < 0.0001), with an average prediction error of 12.6 ms and 6.2 ms for t i and t n , respectively. While the t n results are comparable to other academic models reporting ∼10 ms errors, our approach provides both fiducial point indices from a single model. PWA features derived from PulseAI closely matched those derived from human-annotated labels, including systolic pressure–time integral (r = 0.988, p < 0.0001), augmentation index (AIx) (r = 0.990, p < 0.0001), and end systolic pressure (r = 0.998, p < 0.0001). AIx tertiles showed statistically significant association with height-adjusted pulse transit time (p < 0.05), used as a surrogate of arterial stiffness, demonstrating the model’s sensitivity to stiffness-related changes. These findings demonstrate that PulseAI enables accurate fiducial point detection and represents a clinically viable tool for automated, single-site monitoring of arterial stiffness.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Alessio Tamborini
Arian Aghilinejad
Morteza Gharib
Biomedical Signal Processing and Control
California Institute of Technology
University of California, Merced
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Tamborini et al. (Sat,) reported a other. PulseAI detected arterial waveform fiducial points with errors ≤12.6 ms and AIx correlated strongly (r=0.990) with arterial stiffness in single-site cuff measures.
www.synapsesocial.com/papers/69a76159c6e9836116a2f2ea — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bspc.2026.109840