PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
March 27, 2015Frontiers in Physiology20 citationsOpen Access

Detecting and monitoring arrhythmia recurrence following catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation

OAOlujimi A. AjijolaNBNoel G. BoyleKSKalyanam Shivkumar

Structured PICO

P
Population
Patients undergoing catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation
I
Intervention
Cardiac rhythm monitoring devices (wearable and implantable)
O
Outcome
Detection of atrial fibrillation recurrence

Intensive and prolonged cardiac rhythm monitoring is essential for accurately detecting atrial fibrillation recurrence after catheter ablation, as many recurrences are asymptomatic.

Abstract

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia prompting clinical presentation, is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The incidence and prevalence of this arrhythmia is expected to grow significantly in the coming decades. Of the available pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic treatment options, the fastest growing and most intensely studied is catheter-based ablation therapy for AF. Given the varying success rates for AF ablation, the increasingly complex factors that need to be taken into account when deciding to proceed with ablation, as well as varying definitions of procedural success, accurate detection of arrhythmia recurrence and its burden is of significance. Detecting and monitoring AF recurrence following catheter ablation is therefore an important consideration. Multiple studies have demonstrated the close relationship between the intensity of rhythm monitoring with wearable ambulatory cardiac monitors, or implantable cardiac rhythm monitors and the detection of arrhythmia recurrence. Other studies have employed algorithms dependent on intensive monitoring and arrhythmia detection in the decision tree on whether to proceed with repeat ablation or medical therapy. In this review, we discuss these considerations, types of monitoring devices, and implications for monitoring AF recurrence following catheter ablation.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Ajijola et al. (2015) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a21c4fe4e02479be07c2a62https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2015.00090
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1The Difference of Predictors for Recurrence After Catheter Ablation of Non-Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation According to Follow-Up Period2014 · 32 citations
  2. 2Validation of Clinical Classification Schemes for Predicting Stroke2001 · 4,862 citations
  3. 3Long-term Success and Follow-up After Atrial Fibrillation Ablation2012 · 21 citations
  4. 4Use of an Implantable Monitor to Detect Arrhythmia Recurrences and Select Patients for Early Repeat Catheter Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation2011 · 86 citations
  5. 5Rhythm‐Symptom Correlation in Patients on Continuous Monitoring After Catheter Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation2013 · 43 citations