Key result
Wearables and smartphones offer viable noninvasive long-term AF monitoring options after ablation.
Why the study?
Monitoring methods following catheter or surgical ablation for atrial fibrillation vary in detection capabilities and may undervalue intervention efficacy, necessitating improved long-term monitoring approaches.
Continuous monitoring detects more post-ablation AF recurrences than patch ECG; hypothesis-generating for monitoring standards in trials.
Monitoring following catheter or surgical ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) is an essential tool used to assess outcomes for research purposes and help guide clinical decision making. The most commonly used methods to monitor for postintervention AF include a variety of ambulatory external electrocardiogram monitors, cardiac implantable electronic devices, and more recently, direct to consumer digital health technologies. The traditional metric of ablation success, recurrence > 30 s at 1 year, is below the detection capabilities of almost all monitoring techniques yet still undervalues the efficacy of AF interventions. Measures of AF burden reduction and duration give a more complete assessment of the impact of AF surgeries and ablation. As it is increasingly being recognized that AF burden and duration is related to stroke risk, long-term, inexpensive, noninvasive monitoring methods are needed. Smart phones and watches with AF-detecting capabilities, which are increasingly being used by the majority of U.S. adults, have emerged as viable options to achieve this goal, shifting the paradigm of AF monitoring to a more patient-centered approach.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lohrmann et al. (2020) conducted a review in Atrial fibrillation. Long-term monitoring methods (including smart phones and watches) was evaluated. Smart phones and watches with AF-detecting capabilities have emerged as viable options for long-term, noninvasive monitoring following catheter and surgical ablation for atrial fibrillation.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: