Key result
In dogs with atrial fibrillation receiving anti-arrhythmic drugs, the Holter-derived mean heart rate did not significantly differ between two consecutive 24-hour periods (MD 0.1 bpm, p=0.98).
Why the study?
Daily variability of heart rate in 24-h Holter recordings in dogs with AF receiving antiarrhythmic drugs is unknown and could influence medical decisions.
Does a single 24-h Holter recording adequately assess rate control compared to a 48-h recording in dogs with atrial fibrillation receiving antiarrhythmic drugs?
Observational (n=25)
Yes
Does a single 24-h Holter recording adequately assess rate control compared to a 48-h recording in dogs with atrial fibrillation receiving antiarrhythmic drugs?
A single 24-hour Holter recording is adequate to assess rate control in dogs with atrial fibrillation receiving antiarrhythmic drugs, as daily heart rate variability is low.
Single 24-h Holter suffices for rate-control assessment in canine AF on AAD; supports monitoring stability but leaves VA variability open.
BACKGROUND: Daily variability of heart rate in 24-h Holter recordings in dogs with atrial fibrillation (AF) receiving antiarrhythmic drugs (AAD) is unknown and could influence medical decisions. HYPOTHESIS/OBJECTIVES: Dogs with AF, Holter-derived mean heart rate (meanHRHolter) over 24 h is not significantly different from a subsequent, consecutive 24-h period. ANIMALS: Twenty-five dogs with AF. METHODS: Prospective, descriptive, multicenter study. MeanHRHolter rate and ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) were prospectively analyzed after starting AAD. Clinically relevant difference (defined as ≥ 10 bpm in the meanHRHolter), success of rate control (defined as meanHRHolter ≤ 125 bpm). A Bland-Altman analysis and intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) were calculated to compare two consecutive 24-h Holter recordings. VAs percentage difference [(maximum daily value-minimum daily value)/maximum daily value × 100] and grading variability between recordings were also investigated. RESULTS: Small BIAS with ICC 0.98 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.95-0.99) on meanHRHolter with no statistical difference between two consecutive 24-h Holter recordings (95% CI [-2.84-2.92], degree of freedom 24, p = 0.98). Only 2/25 dogs (8%; 95% CI [2%-25%]) had clinically significant variation, while 1/25 (4%; 95% CI [0%-20%]) dogs showed different classifications in the success of rate control between the consecutive recordings. The VAs percentage difference was 52%, with 7/25 (28%; 95% CI [14%-47%]) dogs showing a VAs grading difference of ≥ 2. CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: The daily heart rate variability in dogs with AF receiving AAD is low, suggesting that a single 24-h Holter recording is adequate to assess rate control. Daily variability might be an important consideration when assessing VAs in dogs with concomitant AF.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Escalda et al. (2025) conducted an observational in Atrial fibrillation (n=25). Second 24-hour Holter recording vs. First 24-hour Holter recording was evaluated on Holter-derived mean heart rate (meanHRHolter) (MD 0.1, 95% CI -2.84-2.92, p=0.98). In dogs with atrial fibrillation receiving anti-arrhythmic drugs, the Holter-derived mean heart rate did not significantly differ between two consecutive 24-hour periods (MD 0.1 bpm, p=0.98).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: