Key result
Additional exclusion of the subsequent interval after extrasystoles significantly reduced HRV parameters like rMSSD by 34%, preventing overestimation compared to excluding extrasystoles alone.
Why the study?
Does the exclusion of extrasystoles and their subsequent intervals improve the reliability of HRV analysis in patients with frequent arrhythmias after acute myocardial infarction?
Observational
Does the exclusion of extrasystoles and their subsequent intervals improve the reliability of HRV analysis in patients with frequent arrhythmias after acute myocardial infarction?
Excluding both extrasystoles and their subsequent intervals prevents considerable overestimation of heart rate variability parameters in the time domain, providing more reliable results.
Clinicians should exclude post-extrasystolic intervals to avoid HRV overestimation in post-MI recordings; extends methodological standards for arrhythmia-affected analyses.
The evaluation of heart rate variability (HRV) is critical in patients with frequent supraventricular or ventricular arrhythmias. Currently available ambulatory ECG monitoring systems usually exclude extrasystoles (ES) from HRV analysis. However, exclusion of ES alone leads to overestimation and false negative results. Therefore, the authors analysed recordings from patients two weeks after acute myocardial infarction with frequent arrhythmias using different exclusion criteria for RR-intervals before and after ES with regard to HRV parameters in time domain 24 hours ambulatory ECG recordings were interactively and prospectively analysed and an annotated RR-interval file loaded on diskette by the analysis system (Zymed 1610). The subsequent analysis of HRV was performed on Apple McIntosh IIfx by software written in C. Intervals around ES could be flexibly in- or excluded in various ways. The additional exclusion of the subsequent interval after ES results in a highly significant reduction of 34% for root mean square of successive differences, 28% for proportion of adjacent interval with >50 ms difference, 21% for coefficient of variation, and 20% for average of 5 min standard deviations. The reduction for other parameters of HRV was below 10%. The error was related to the frequency of arrhythmias and was higher for ventricular in comparison to supraventricular arrhythmias. Additional exclusion of any further intervals did not reveal significant changes. It is concluded that HRV parameters, especially those parameters based on successive differences, can be considerably overestimated by inadequate exclusion of frequent arrhythmias. However, the exclusion of extrasystoles and their subsequent intervals is a useful method to provide reliable results of HRV analysis in the time domain.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">></ETX>
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Brüggemann et al. (2002) conducted an observational in Acute myocardial infarction with frequent arrhythmias. Additional exclusion of the subsequent interval after extrasystoles vs. Exclusion of extrasystoles alone was evaluated on Heart rate variability (HRV) parameters in the time domain (34% reduction for root mean square of successive differences). Additional exclusion of the subsequent interval after extrasystoles significantly reduced HRV parameters like rMSSD by 34%, preventing overestimation compared to excluding extrasystoles alone.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: