Literature DB >> 21895885

Continuous monitoring versus HOLTER ECG for detection of atrial fibrillation in patients with stroke.

C Gumbinger1, U Krumsdorf, R Veltkamp, W Hacke, P Ringleb.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND
PURPOSE: Detection of atrial fibrillation is of vital importance because oral anticoagulation decreases the risk of a stroke by 64%. Current standards for stroke unit treatment require continuous electrocardiogram (ECG) monitoring for at least 24 h. Additionally, a 24-h HOLTER ECG (HOLTER) should be performed in selected patients. It remains unclear whether continuous monitoring at the bedside is equivalent to HOLTER for the detection of atrial fibrillation. Furthermore, we investigate how many additional patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation can be identified as a result of a longer duration of continuous monitoring.
METHODS: In this study, we prospectively compared the detection rates of HOLTER and 24-h monitoring at the Stroke Unit at the University of Heidelberg over a period of 9 months. Continuous monitoring was analyzed by trained nurses, HOLTER by cardiologists.
RESULTS: We included 370 patients with ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) in our study. Of these, 192 patients underwent HOLTER. Previously unknown atrial fibrillation was detected in 44 patients, 13 patients had no atrial fibrillation in baseline ECG, but atrial fibrillation was detected by continuous monitoring. In two patients, the HOLTER showed atrial fibrillation; both patients had also been detected by continuous monitoring. Median time to detection of the atrial fibrillation during continuous monitoring was 43 h after hospitalization.
CONCLUSION: In this study, use of HOLTER does not give any additional benefit in comparison with continuous monitoring with intermittent analysis by trained staff alone. The median detection time of 43 h emphasizes the importance of longer continuous monitoring.
© 2011 The Author(s). European Journal of Neurology © 2011 EFNS.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21895885     DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-1331.2011.03519.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Neurol        ISSN: 1351-5101            Impact factor:   6.089


  7 in total

1.  Left atrial appendage dysfunction in acute cerebral embolism patients with sinus rhythm: correlation with pulse wave tissue Doppler imaging.

Authors:  Kazuyoshi Kaneko; Yoichiro Otaki; Shinpei Kadowaki; Taro Narumi; Hiroki Saito; Nobuyuki Kiribayashi; Koki Omi; Toshiki Sasaki; Takeshi Niizeki; Shigeo Sugawara; Isao Kubota
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2014-05-23       Impact factor: 2.357

2.  Multiple subcortical acute ischemic lesions reflect small vessel disease rather than cardiogenic embolism.

Authors:  M E Wolf; T Sauer; R Kern; K Szabo; M G Hennerici
Journal:  J Neurol       Date:  2012-02-17       Impact factor: 4.849

Review 3.  Detection of occult atrial fibrillation in patients with embolic stroke of uncertain source: a work in progress.

Authors:  Jason G Andrade; Thalia Field; Paul Khairy
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2015-04-01       Impact factor: 4.566

4.  Atrial fibrillation in patients with first-ever stroke: Incidence trends and antithrombotic therapy before the event.

Authors:  Yo Han Jung; Young Dae Kim; Jinkwon Kim; Sang Won Han; Kyung-Yul Lee
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-12-19       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Predictors of Atrial Fibrillation in Holter Monitoring after Stroke - A Ten Year Flashback.

Authors:  Tânia Proença; Ricardo Alves Pinto; Miguel Martins de Carvalho; Carla Sousa; Paula Dias; Manuel Campelo; Filipe Macedo
Journal:  Arq Bras Cardiol       Date:  2022-08       Impact factor: 2.667

6.  Algorithms based on CWT and classifiers to control cardiac alterations and stress using an ECG and a SCR.

Authors:  María Viqueira Villarejo; Begoña García Zapirain; Amaia Méndez Zorrilla
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2013-05-10       Impact factor: 3.576

7.  Atrial fibrillation detection using single lead portable electrocardiographic monitoring: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Satish Ramkumar; Nitesh Nerlekar; Daniel D'Souza; Derek J Pol; Jonathan M Kalman; Thomas H Marwick
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2018-09-17       Impact factor: 2.692

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.