Literature DB >> 22397942

Is 7-day event triggered ECG recording equivalent to 7-day Holter ECG recording for atrial fibrillation screening?

Laurent Roten1, Manuel Schilling, Andreas Häberlin, Jens Seiler, Nicola G Schwick, Jürg Fuhrer, Etienne Delacrétaz, Hildegard Tanner.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Prolonged ECG monitoring is standard for atrial fibrillation (AF) screening. This study investigated whether 7-day event triggered (tECG) ECG recording is equivalent to 7-day continuous Holter (cECG) ECG recording for AF screening.
DESIGN: Both a cECG (Lifecard CF) and a tECG (R.Test Evolution 3) were simultaneously worn for 7 days by patients with known or suspected paroxysmal AF.
RESULTS: In 100 corresponding recordings, median effective duration of monitoring was 165 h (range 10-170 h) for cECG and 137 h (0-169 h) for tECG (p<0.001). Median number and total duration of arrhythmias (AF, atrial flutter or atrial tachycardia) of ≥30 s duration recorded by cECG were 10 (1-428) and 1030 min (≤1-10,020), respectively. An arrhythmia was recorded in 42 cECGs (42%) versus 37 tECGs (37%, p=0.56). Triggered ECG failed to record an arrhythmia in cECG positive cases because of interrupted monitoring in four cases and because of recording failure in one case. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of tECG therefore were 88%, 100%, 100%, and 92%, respectively. Quantitative cECG analysis required a median of 20 min (3-205 min) and qualitative tECG analysis 4 min (1-20 min; p<0.001). Skin irritation was a frequent side effect (42%) resulting in premature removal of devices in 16% of patients.
CONCLUSION: Sensitivity of tECG for AF screening as compared to cECG is lower, mainly because of shorter effective monitoring duration. Qualitative tECG analysis is less time consuming than quantitative cECG analysis. Skin irritation is a frequent side effect and reason for premature device removal.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22397942     DOI: 10.1136/heartjnl-2011-301455

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Heart        ISSN: 1355-6037            Impact factor:   5.994


  4 in total

Review 1.  Secondary Stroke Prevention: Improving Diagnosis and Management with Newer Technologies.

Authors:  Yahia Z Imam; Atlantic D'Souza; Rayaz A Malik; Ashfaq Shuaib
Journal:  Transl Stroke Res       Date:  2016-09-02       Impact factor: 6.829

Review 2.  Advances in the Detection and Monitoring of Atrial Fibrillation for Patients with Cryptogenic Ischemic Stroke.

Authors:  Rajbeer Singh Sangha; Richard Bernstein
Journal:  Curr Atheroscler Rep       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 5.113

3.  Performance of an external transtelephonic loop recorder for automated detection of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation.

Authors:  Bob Oude Velthuis; Jorieke Bos; Karin Kraaier; Jeroen Stevenhagen; Jurren M van Opstal; Job van der Palen; Marcoen F Scholten
Journal:  Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol       Date:  2013-09-09       Impact factor: 1.468

4.  MR-imaging pattern is not a predictor of occult atrial fibrillation in patients with cryptogenic stroke.

Authors:  C Vollmuth; S Stoesser; H Neugebauer; A Hansel; J Dreyhaupt; A C Ludolph; J Kassubek; K Althaus
Journal:  J Neurol       Date:  2019-09-11       Impact factor: 4.849

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.