Key result
Extended rhythm monitoring detects actionable arrhythmias in up to ~41% of ACHD patients.
Why the study?
To assess whether extended arrhythmia and bradycardia screening instruments in adult congenital heart disease lead to meaningful changes in clinical care.
Does extended arrhythmia screening using non-invasive instruments lead to meaningful changes in clinical care in adult congenital heart disease patients?
Does extended arrhythmia screening using non-invasive instruments lead to meaningful changes in clinical care in adult congenital heart disease patients?
Extended arrhythmia screening using contemporary non-invasive technologies offers a high diagnostic yield (18-41%) and is a promising alternative to traditional Holter monitoring in adult congenital heart disease patients.
Supports evaluation of extended monitoring in ACHD; leaves open whether detection changes management or outcomes.
The European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of adult congenital heart disease patients recommend screening for arrhythmias and bradycardias in symptomatic patients, often being done by means of an ambulatory 24-48-hour Holter or implantable loop recorder (ILR). However, nowadays non-invasive instruments, such as patches, smartwatches and smartphones based on single-lead ECGs that perform extended monitoring, are also available. The aim of this narrative review was to assess whether these instruments, when they detect arrhythmias and bradycardias in patients with adult congenital heart disease, will lead to meaningful changes in clinical care. Clinically meaningful changes include adjustment of medication, cardioversion, electrophysiology study, ablation or implantation of a cardiovascular implantable electronic device. The following monitoring instruments are discussed: cumulative Holter, 2-week continuous monitor, smartwatchand smartphone-based single-lead ECG, and ILR. The diagnostic yield of extended rhythm monitoring is high, and varies between 18% (smartphone-based single-lead ECG) and 41% with ILR. In conclusion, contemporary arrhythmia screening includes various new non-invasive technologies that are promising new tools as an alternative to Holter monitoring or ILR. However, the optimal mode of detection is still unclear due to the lack of head-to-head comparisons.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Koole et al. (2024) conducted a review in Adult congenital heart disease. Extended rhythm monitoring was evaluated on Diagnostic yield. Extended rhythm monitoring in adult congenital heart disease patients had a diagnostic yield varying between 18% for smartphone-based single-lead ECGs and 41% for implantable loop recorders.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: