Key result
Patch external loop recorder achieves ~38% diagnostic yield for clinically significant arrhythmias in symptomatic patients.
Why the study?
Electrocardiographic monitoring methods for long-term arrhythmia diagnosis in India, especially using external loop recorders, had not been evaluated for diagnostic yield and patient compliance.
Does an auto-triggered, wireless patch-type external loop recorder improve diagnostic yield for clinically significant arrhythmias in patients presenting with symptoms like syncope or palpitations?
Observational (n=125)
Does an auto-triggered, wireless patch-type external loop recorder improve diagnostic yield for clinically significant arrhythmias in patients presenting with symptoms like syncope or palpitations?
A wireless patch-type external loop recorder provides a high diagnostic yield (38% for significant arrhythmias) and excellent compliance (98%) in Indian patients, leading to therapy changes in nearly a quarter of cases.
May support arrhythmia detection in symptomatic patients; leaves open need for randomized trials versus standard monitoring.
Electrocardiographic monitoring represents one of the most reliable and time-tested methods for reducing ambiguity in cardiac arrhythmia diagnosis. In India, the resting ECG is generally the first tool of choice for in-clinic diagnosis. The external loop recorder (ELR) is another useful tool that compounds the advantages of traditional tools by coupling ambulatory monitoring with a long-term window. Thus, the objective was to test the use of a 7-day ELR for arrhythmia diagnosis in India for a broad range of presenting symptoms. In this study set in the Indian healthcare environment, an auto-triggered, wireless patch-type ELR was used with 125 patients (62.5 ± 16.7 years, 76 males) presenting a broad range of symptoms. Eighty percent of the symptoms were related to syncope, presyncope or palpitations. Patients were administered an ELR for 7-28 days depending on the physician's prescription. Prespecified significant arrhythmias included sinus pause >2 s, symptomatic bradycardia <40 b.p.m., second-degree (and higher) AV block, complete heart block, ventricular fibrillation, sustained/nonsustained ventricular tachycardia (>3 beats), atrial fibrillation (chronic or paroxysmal), atrial flutter and supraventricular tachycardia (SVT) >130 b.p.m. Diagnostic yield was 38% when a stringent tabulation methodology considering only clinically significant arrhythmia was used. When first-degree AV block, premature atrial and ventricular beats, couplets (both atrial and ventricular in origin), bigeminy or trigeminy, or sudden changes in rate (noted as sinus arrhythmia) were included in the calculation, diagnostic yield was 80%. Patient compliance was 98%; patients wore the patch for the entire prescribed monitoring period without disruption. Seventy percent of the reported symptoms corresponded with an arrhythmia. Use of the ELR led to therapy change in 24% of patients: 15 patients went on to receive an implantable cardioverter defibrillator or pacemaker, 4 received ablation therapy and 11 altered their medication after diagnosis. This study demonstrates that a high diagnostic yield for clinically significant arrhythmias and high patient compliance can be achieved with a wearable patch monitor in Indian patients suffering from a variety of symptoms.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shrivastav et al. (2013) conducted an observational in cardiac arrhythmia (n=125). auto-triggered, wireless patch-type external loop recorder (ELR) was evaluated on Diagnostic yield for clinically significant arrhythmia.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: