Key result
7-day continuous ECG patch monitoring detects ~82% more arrhythmias than 24-hour Holter monitoring.
Why the study?
Detecting high-risk arrhythmia is important in evaluating palpitations, prompting a comparison of diagnostic accuracy between 7-day patch ECG and 24-h Holter monitoring.
Does 7-day patch-type ECG monitoring improve the detection of significant arrhythmias compared to 24-h Holter monitoring in patients with palpitations, chest pain, or syncope?
Observational (n=58)
No
Does 7-day patch-type ECG monitoring improve the detection of significant arrhythmias compared to 24-h Holter monitoring in patients with palpitations, chest pain, or syncope?
Absolute Event Rate: 34.5% vs 19%
p-value: p=0.008
A 7-day continuous ECG patch monitor significantly increases the detection rate of clinically relevant arrhythmias compared to standard 24-hour Holter monitoring in symptomatic patients.
7-day patch monitoring was associated with higher arrhythmia detection; leaves open need for larger trials before changing practice.
Background Detecting high‐risk arrhythmia is important in diagnosing patients with palpitations. We compared the diagnostic accuracies of 7‐day patch‐type electrocardiographic (ECG) monitoring and 24‐h Holter monitoring for detecting significant arrhythmias in patients with palpitations. Methods This was a single‐center prospective trial with 58 participants who presented with palpitations, chest pain or syncope. Outcomes were defined as the detection of any one of six arrhythmias, including supraventricular tachycardia (SVT), atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter lasting more than 30 s, pauses of more than 3 s, high‐degree atrioventricular block, ventricular tachycardia (VT) >3 beats, or polymorphic VT/ventricular fibrillation. The McNemar test for paired proportions was used to compare arrhythmia detection rates. Results The overall arrhythmia detection rate was higher with 7‐day ECG patch monitoring than with 24‐h Holter monitoring (34.5% vs. 19.0%, p = .008). Compared with the use of 24‐h Holter monitors, the use of 7‐day ECG patch monitors was associated with higher detection of SVT (29.3% vs. 13.8%, p = .042). No serious adverse skin reactions were reported among the ECG patch‐monitored participants. Conclusions The results suggest that a 7‐day patch‐type continuous ECG monitor is more effective for the detection of supraventricular tachycardia than is a 24‐h Holter monitor. However, the clinical significance of device detected arrhythmia should be consolidated.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kim et al. (2023) conducted an observational in Palpitations, chest pain, or syncope (n=58). 7-day patch-type electrocardiographic (ECG) monitoring vs. 24-h Holter monitoring was evaluated on Detection of any one of six arrhythmias (SVT, AF/AFL >30s, pauses >3s, high-degree AV block, VT >3 beats, or polymorphic VT/VF) (p=0.008). 7-day continuous ECG patch monitoring detected significantly more arrhythmias than 24-h Holter monitoring (34.5% vs. 19.0%, p=0.008).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: