Prospective comparison of the diagnostic utility of a standard event monitor versus a “leadless” portable ECG monitor in the evaluation of patients with palpitations
- 3 April 2008
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Springer Science and Business Media LLC in Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology
- Vol. 22 (1), 39-44
- https://doi.org/10.1007/s10840-008-9251-0
Abstract
Current ambulatory ECG monitoring systems are limited in their ability to diagnose patients with palpitations. The aim of this prospective study was to compare a new “leadless” ambulatory monitor with a standard event monitor in the evaluation of patients with palpitations. Eighteen consecutive patients (11 female, 56 ± 16 years) referred for evaluation of palpitations were provided with both a standard event monitor and a “leadless” monitor for 30 days. They were asked to record episodes of palpitations with both monitoring devices. All 18 individuals were compliant with the “leadless” monitor for the 30-day period while only 14 (78%) patients were compliant with the standard event monitor (p = 0.10). During a combined monitoring period of 563 days, 159 symptomatic episodes were recorded with the “leadless” ECG monitor (8.8 ± 9.7 per patient, range 1–35) and 169 symptomatic episodes were recorded with the event monitor (12 ± 8.3 per patient, range 1–33) (p = NS). The “leadless” ECG monitor recorded arrhythmias in 13 of 18 patients (72%) and the standard event monitor recorded arrhythmias in 8 of 14 patients (57%) (p = NS). The “leadless” ECG monitor is associated with high patient compliance and results in high quality ECG recordings. The diagnostic yield of this monitoring system is equivalent to a standard event monitor.Keywords
This publication has 10 references indexed in Scilit:
- Symptomatic and Asymptomatic Atrial Fibrillation in Patients Undergoing Radiofrequency Catheter AblationJournal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology, 2006
- A prospective randomized comparison of loop recorders versus Holter monitors in patients with syncope or presyncopeAmerican Journal Of Medicine, 2003
- The Evolving Role of Ambulatory Arrhythmia Monitoring in General Clinical PracticeAnnals of Internal Medicine, 1999
- Diagnostic Yield and Optimal Duration of Continuous-Loop Event Monitoring for the Diagnosis of Palpitations: A Cost-Effectiveness AnalysisAnnals of Internal Medicine, 1998
- Evaluation of Patients with PalpitationsNew England Journal of Medicine, 1998
- Utility and Cost of Event Recorders in the Diagnosis of Palpitations, Presyncope, and SyncopeThe American Journal of Cardiology, 1997
- Cardiac Event Recorders Yield More Diagnoses and Are More Cost-effective than 48-Hour Holter Monitoring in Patients with Palpitations: A Controlled Clinical TrialAnnals of Internal Medicine, 1996
- Use of Ambulatory Electrocardiographic (Holter) MonitoringAnnals of Internal Medicine, 1990
- Diagnostic Utility of Memory Equipped Transtelephonic MonitorsThe American Journal of the Medical Sciences, 1988
- Detection of arrhythmias: use of a patient-activated ambulatory electrocardiogram device with a solid-state memory loop.Heart, 1987