Key result
Serial 14-day ECG monitors achieved 64.6% sensitivity (95% CI 53.6-74.3%) for detecting postablation atrial arrhythmia recurrence compared to continuous implantable cardiac monitors.
Why the study?
Various noninvasive intermittent rhythm monitoring strategies have been used in AF trials, but whether any frequency and duration accurately detects recurrences and approximates continuous ICM-derived AF burden was unknown.
Do noninvasive intermittent rhythm monitoring strategies accurately detect arrhythmia recurrences and approximate AF burden compared to continuous monitoring with an implantable cardiac monitor in post-ablation AF patients?
Observational (n=346)
Do noninvasive intermittent rhythm monitoring strategies accurately detect arrhythmia recurrences and approximate AF burden compared to continuous monitoring with an implantable cardiac monitor in post-ablation AF patients?
Serial long-term (7-14 day) intermittent monitors accumulating at least 28 days annually provide AF burden estimates comparable to ICMs, though ICMs remain the gold standard for arrhythmia detection in clinical trials.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Serial 14-day monitors may approximate ICM AF burden post-ablation; leaves open adequacy for recurrence detection in trials.
A 2021 study conducted an observational in Atrial fibrillation (n=346). Serial 14-day ECG monitors vs. Implantable cardiac monitor (ICM) was evaluated on Sensitivity for detecting arrhythmia recurrence (95% CI 53.6-74.3). Serial 14-day ECG monitors achieved 64.6% sensitivity (95% CI 53.6-74.3%) for detecting postablation atrial arrhythmia recurrence compared to continuous implantable cardiac monitors.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: