Key result
Insertable cardiac monitors trigger false arrhythmia alerts from inadequate R-wave sensing in 20% of patients.
Why the study?
Diagnostic performance of insertable cardiac monitors can be hampered by false positive arrhythmia alerts related to inadequate R-wave sensing, prompting an assessment of its prevalence and predictors across different device types.
What is the prevalence and predictors of inadequate R-wave sensing leading to false arrhythmia alerts in patients with insertable cardiac monitors?
Observational (n=135)
No
What is the prevalence and predictors of inadequate R-wave sensing leading to false arrhythmia alerts in patients with insertable cardiac monitors?
False arrhythmia alerts due to inadequate R-wave sensing occur in 20% of patients with insertable cardiac monitors, primarily driven by undersensing, independent of patient or implant characteristics.
BACKGROUND: Insertable cardiac monitors (ICM) allow prolonged rhythm monitoring, but the diagnostic performance can be hampered by false positive arrhythmia alerts related to inadequate R-wave sensing. This study assesses the prevalence and predictors of inadequate R-wave sensing (both over- and undersensing) among different ICM types. METHODS: Patients implanted with an ICM at Ghent University Hospital between January 2017 and August 2018 were included. ICM tracings recorded at interrogation or transmitted by remote monitoring were reviewed for inadequate R-wave sensing leading to false arrhythmia alerts. Patient and implant characteristics were retrieved from the medical records and implant reports. RESULTS: The study screened 135 patients (age 59 ± 19 years, 44% female) implanted with different ICM types: Reveal LINQ™ and XT (Medtronic): n = 92 (68%), Confirm and Confirm Rx (Abbott): n = 35 (26%), and BioMonitor 2 (Biotronik): n = 8 (6%). ICM tracings were analyzed in 112 patients (83%). False arrhythmia alerts occurred in 22 (20%) patients, most frequently related to undersensing (77%). False diagnosis of bradycardia or pause was documented in 64%, false high ventricular rates in 14%, and false atrial fibrillation alerts in 22%. Occurrence of R-wave changes was not related to patient characteristics or implant R-wave sensing. A trend toward higher number of inadequate R-wave sensing seems to occur with nonparasternal implant sites (P = .074). CONCLUSIONS: False arrhythmia alerts due to inadequate R-wave sensing occurred in 20% of ICM patients independent of implant features and patient characteristics.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Coster et al. (2020) conducted an observational in Patients implanted with an insertable cardiac monitor (n=135). Insertable cardiac monitors (ICM) was evaluated on False arrhythmia alerts due to inadequate R-wave sensing. False arrhythmia alerts due to inadequate R-wave sensing occurred in 20% of patients with insertable cardiac monitors, independent of implant features and patient characteristics.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: