Key result
Continuous monitoring with an implantable loop recorder detected incident atrial fibrillation in 44% of patients with heart failure with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction, yielding an incidence rate of 27.1 per 100 person-years.
Why the study?
Reliable data on the prevalence, incidence, and detection of AF from contemporary, prospective HFmrEF/HFpEF studies were scarce.
Does continuous monitoring with an implantable loop recorder improve the detection of incident atrial fibrillation compared to conventional monitoring in patients with HFmrEF/HFpEF?
Observational (n=113)
Yes
Does continuous monitoring with an implantable loop recorder improve the detection of incident atrial fibrillation compared to conventional monitoring in patients with HFmrEF/HFpEF?
Continuous monitoring with an implantable loop recorder reveals a high incidence of subclinical atrial fibrillation in patients with HFmrEF/HFpEF, significantly outperforming conventional ECG and Holter monitoring.
BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is common in heart failure with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction (HFmrEF/HFpEF) and has a negative impact on outcome. Reliable data on prevalence, incidence, and detection of AF from contemporary, prospective HFmrEF/HFpEF studies are scarce. METHODS: This was a prespecified sub-analysis from a prospective, multicenter study. Patients with HFmrEF/HFpEF underwent 12-lead electrocardiography (ECG), 24 h Holter monitoring, and received an implantable loop recorder (ILR) at the study start. During the 2 year follow-up, rhythm monitoring was performed via ILR, yearly ECG, and two yearly 24 h Holter monitors. RESULTS: A total of 113 patients were included (mean age 73 ± 8 years, 75% HFpEF). At baseline, 70 patients (62%) had a diagnosis of AF: 21 paroxysmal, 18 persistent, and 31 permanent AF. At study start, 45 patients were in AF. Of the 43 patients without a history of AF, 19 developed incident AF during a median follow-up of 23 [15-25] months (44%; incidence rate 27.1 (95% confidence interval 16.3-42.4) per 100 person-years). Thus, after the 2-year follow-up, 89 patients (79%) had a diagnosis of AF. In 11/19 incident AF cases (i.e., 58%), AF was solely detected on the ILR. Yearly 12-lead ECG detected six incident AF cases and four of these cases were also detected on two yearly 24 h Holter monitors. Two incident AF cases were detected on an unplanned ECG/Holter. CONCLUSIONS: Atrial fibrillation is extremely common in heart failure with HFmrEF/HFpEF and may inform on symptom evaluation and treatment options. AF screening with an ILR had a much higher diagnostic yield than conventional modalities.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gorter et al. (2023) conducted an observational in Heart failure with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction (HFmrEF/HFpEF) (n=113). Implantable loop recorder (ILR) vs. Yearly 12-lead ECG and 24-hour Holter monitoring was evaluated on Incidence rate of atrial fibrillation (per 100 person-years) (95% CI 16.3-42.4). Continuous monitoring with an implantable loop recorder detected incident atrial fibrillation in 44% of patients with heart failure with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction, yielding an incidence rate of 27.1 per 100 person-years.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: