INTRODUCTION: Evaluating and comparing the success of surgical ablation techniques in the treatment of atrial fibrillation is complicated by clinicians' use of varying techniques to measure the burden of atrial fibrillation after ablation. Intuitively, one would expect longer monitoring to be more accurate, picking up atrial fibrillation events occurring at a low rate, but how long is long enough? This study compared rates of normal sinus rhythm recorded after atrial fibrillation ablation in a cohort of patients monitored for a range of durations. METHODS: Two hundred fifty-four patients (50.4% paroxysmal) underwent surgical ablation for treatment of atrial fibrillation. All patients were monitored at 6 months with both electrocardiography and either an event monitor or implanted pacemaker device that could be interrogated. Event monitoring and pacemaker data were analyzed for rhythm at 24 hours, 7 days, and 14 days; pacemaker data were also analyzed at 3 months. RESULTS: In the overall group, we found that rates of normal sinus rhythm detected were greatest with electrocardiography (91.7%) and decreased significantly at each of the longer durations (88.2% at 24 hours, 82.7% at 7 days, 81.1% at 14 days). Pacemaker data from a subset of patients revealed minimal or no statistically significant changes from 7 days to 3 months. Results were consistent across types of atrial fibrillation. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that rhythm measurements in patients with atrial fibrillation differ according to the measurement duration used. We recommend longer-term monitoring, with 7 days providing both good accuracy and good patient compliance.
INTRODUCTION: Evaluating and comparing the success of surgical ablation techniques in the treatment of atrial fibrillation is complicated by clinicians' use of varying techniques to measure the burden of atrial fibrillation after ablation. Intuitively, one would expect longer monitoring to be more accurate, picking up atrial fibrillation events occurring at a low rate, but how long is long enough? This study compared rates of normal sinus rhythm recorded after atrial fibrillation ablation in a cohort of patients monitored for a range of durations. METHODS: Two hundred fifty-four patients (50.4% paroxysmal) underwent surgical ablation for treatment of atrial fibrillation. All patients were monitored at 6 months with both electrocardiography and either an event monitor or implanted pacemaker device that could be interrogated. Event monitoring and pacemaker data were analyzed for rhythm at 24 hours, 7 days, and 14 days; pacemaker data were also analyzed at 3 months. RESULTS: In the overall group, we found that rates of normal sinus rhythm detected were greatest with electrocardiography (91.7%) and decreased significantly at each of the longer durations (88.2% at 24 hours, 82.7% at 7 days, 81.1% at 14 days). Pacemaker data from a subset of patients revealed minimal or no statistically significant changes from 7 days to 3 months. Results were consistent across types of atrial fibrillation. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that rhythm measurements in patients with atrial fibrillation differ according to the measurement duration used. We recommend longer-term monitoring, with 7 days providing both good accuracy and good patient compliance.
Authors: Hugh Calkins; Gerhard Hindricks; Riccardo Cappato; Young-Hoon Kim; Eduardo B Saad; Luis Aguinaga; Joseph G Akar; Vinay Badhwar; Josep Brugada; John Camm; Peng-Sheng Chen; Shih-Ann Chen; Mina K Chung; Jens Cosedis Nielsen; Anne B Curtis; D Wyn Davies; John D Day; André d'Avila; N M S Natasja de Groot; Luigi Di Biase; Mattias Duytschaever; James R Edgerton; Kenneth A Ellenbogen; Patrick T Ellinor; Sabine Ernst; Guilherme Fenelon; Edward P Gerstenfeld; David E Haines; Michel Haissaguerre; Robert H Helm; Elaine Hylek; Warren M Jackman; Jose Jalife; Jonathan M Kalman; Josef Kautzner; Hans Kottkamp; Karl Heinz Kuck; Koichiro Kumagai; Richard Lee; Thorsten Lewalter; Bruce D Lindsay; Laurent Macle; Moussa Mansour; Francis E Marchlinski; Gregory F Michaud; Hiroshi Nakagawa; Andrea Natale; Stanley Nattel; Ken Okumura; Douglas Packer; Evgeny Pokushalov; Matthew R Reynolds; Prashanthan Sanders; Mauricio Scanavacca; Richard Schilling; Claudio Tondo; Hsuan-Ming Tsao; Atul Verma; David J Wilber; Teiichi Yamane Journal: Heart Rhythm Date: 2017-05-12 Impact factor: 6.343
Authors: Hugh Calkins; Karl Heinz Kuck; Riccardo Cappato; Josep Brugada; A John Camm; Shih-Ann Chen; Harry J G Crijns; Ralph J Damiano; D Wyn Davies; John DiMarco; James Edgerton; Kenneth Ellenbogen; Michael D Ezekowitz; David E Haines; Michel Haissaguerre; Gerhard Hindricks; Yoshito Iesaka; Warren Jackman; José Jalife; Pierre Jais; Jonathan Kalman; David Keane; Young-Hoon Kim; Paulus Kirchhof; George Klein; Hans Kottkamp; Koichiro Kumagai; Bruce D Lindsay; Moussa Mansour; Francis E Marchlinski; Patrick M McCarthy; J Lluis Mont; Fred Morady; Koonlawee Nademanee; Hiroshi Nakagawa; Andrea Natale; Stanley Nattel; Douglas L Packer; Carlo Pappone; Eric Prystowsky; Antonio Raviele; Vivek Reddy; Jeremy N Ruskin; Richard J Shemin; Hsuan-Ming Tsao; David Wilber Journal: Heart Rhythm Date: 2012-03-01 Impact factor: 6.343
Authors: Hugh Calkins; Karl Heinz Kuck; Riccardo Cappato; Josep Brugada; A John Camm; Shih-Ann Chen; Harry J G Crijns; Ralph J Damiano; D Wyn Davies; John DiMarco; James Edgerton; Kenneth Ellenbogen; Michael D Ezekowitz; David E Haines; Michel Haissaguerre; Gerhard Hindricks; Yoshito Iesaka; Warren Jackman; Jose Jalife; Pierre Jais; Jonathan Kalman; David Keane; Young-Hoon Kim; Paulus Kirchhof; George Klein; Hans Kottkamp; Koichiro Kumagai; Bruce D Lindsay; Moussa Mansour; Francis E Marchlinski; Patrick M McCarthy; J Lluis Mont; Fred Morady; Koonlawee Nademanee; Hiroshi Nakagawa; Andrea Natale; Stanley Nattel; Douglas L Packer; Carlo Pappone; Eric Prystowsky; Antonio Raviele; Vivek Reddy; Jeremy N Ruskin; Richard J Shemin; Hsuan-Ming Tsao; David Wilber Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2012-03 Impact factor: 1.900
Authors: Hugh Calkins; Gerhard Hindricks; Riccardo Cappato; Young-Hoon Kim; Eduardo B Saad; Luis Aguinaga; Joseph G Akar; Vinay Badhwar; Josep Brugada; John Camm; Peng-Sheng Chen; Shih-Ann Chen; Mina K Chung; Jens Cosedis Nielsen; Anne B Curtis; D Wyn Davies; John D Day; André d'Avila; N M S Natasja de Groot; Luigi Di Biase; Mattias Duytschaever; James R Edgerton; Kenneth A Ellenbogen; Patrick T Ellinor; Sabine Ernst; Guilherme Fenelon; Edward P Gerstenfeld; David E Haines; Michel Haissaguerre; Robert H Helm; Elaine Hylek; Warren M Jackman; Jose Jalife; Jonathan M Kalman; Josef Kautzner; Hans Kottkamp; Karl Heinz Kuck; Koichiro Kumagai; Richard Lee; Thorsten Lewalter; Bruce D Lindsay; Laurent Macle; Moussa Mansour; Francis E Marchlinski; Gregory F Michaud; Hiroshi Nakagawa; Andrea Natale; Stanley Nattel; Ken Okumura; Douglas Packer; Evgeny Pokushalov; Matthew R Reynolds; Prashanthan Sanders; Mauricio Scanavacca; Richard Schilling; Claudio Tondo; Hsuan-Ming Tsao; Atul Verma; David J Wilber; Teiichi Yamane Journal: Europace Date: 2018-01-01 Impact factor: 5.214
Authors: Michael Klum; Mike Urban; Timo Tigges; Alexandru-Gabriel Pielmus; Aarne Feldheiser; Theresa Schmitt; Reinhold Orglmeister Journal: Sensors (Basel) Date: 2020-04-04 Impact factor: 3.576