Key result
PTER linked to ~21% more clinically relevant information during symptomatic events vs King of Hearts monitors.
Why the study?
Does the Patient-Triggered Event Records (PTER) feature improve diagnostic utility and reduce costs compared to a loop event monitor in pacemaker patients with symptomatic events?
Population
16 pacemaker patients with the PTER feature experiencing symptomatic events, and 3 pacemakers tested in vitro
Comparison
Patient-Triggered Event Records feature in… vs King of Hearts loop event monitor
Design
Cohort
Authors
Loading...
May support PTER for higher-yield, lower-cost symptom evaluation in pacemaker patients; leaves open randomized confirmation.
Observational (n=16)
Does the Patient-Triggered Event Records (PTER) feature improve diagnostic utility and reduce costs compared to a loop event monitor in pacemaker patients with symptomatic events?
Absolute Event Rate: 98% vs 81%
The PTER feature in pacemakers is an accurate, cost-effective first-line diagnostic tool for evaluating paroxysmal symptoms in pacemaker patients compared to external loop recorders.
Machado et al. (1996) conducted an observational in Pacemaker patients with symptomatic events (n=16). Patient-Triggered Event Records (PTER) vs. King of Hearts (loop event monitor) was evaluated on Production of clinically relevant information during symptomatic events. Patient-Triggered Event Records (PTER) produced clinically relevant information in 98% of symptomatic events compared to 81% with the King of Hearts monitor, at a lower cost.