Daily ECG transmission versus serial 6-day Holter ECG for the assessment of efficacy of ablation for atrial fibrillation - the AGNES-ECG study

Agnieszka Sikorska, Jakub Baran, Roman Piotrowski, Tomasz Kryński, Joanna Szymot, Małgorzata Soszyńska, Piotr Kułakowski, Agnieszka Sikorska, Jakub Baran, Roman Piotrowski, Tomasz Kryński, Joanna Szymot, Małgorzata Soszyńska, Piotr Kułakowski

Abstract

Purpose: To compare daily ECG transmissions using trans-telephonic monitoring (TTM) with repeated 6-day Holter ECG in detecting atrial fibrillation (AF) episodes following ablation.

Methods: Each patient underwent two types of recordings: daily ECG TTM lasting 30 s and standard 6-day ambulatory ECG monitoring performed 3, 6, and 12 months after ablation. Number of patients with detected AF recurrences, time to first detected recurrence of AF, and AF burden were assessed.

Results: Fifty patients (9 females, mean age 57 ± 11 years) were included. The mean duration of the follow-up was 382 ± 38 days. A total of 17,573 (mean 351 ± 111 per patient) TTM recordings were performed and 99.95% of recordings were of quality sufficient to assess cardiac rhythm. Altogether, 14 (28%) patients had AF recurrence. Holter ECG detected AF recurrence in 7 (14%) patients whereas TTM - in 12 (24%) patients, p = 0.0416 (TTM only - 7 (14%), Holter ECG only - 2 (4%), and both methods - 5 (10%)). Time to the first AF recurrence tended to be shorter using TTM than Holter ECG (156 ± 91 vs 204 ± 121 days, p = 0.0819). There was no significant difference in AF burden assessed by TTM versus Holter ECG recordings 3.1 ± 0.14% vs 4.8 ± 0.2%, p = 0.21.

Conclusions: Compared with Holter ECG, daily 30-s ECG recordings detected more patients with AF recurrences. Time to first detected AF episode tended to be shorter using TTM. Daily ECG recordings transmitted using smartphone may replace standard Holter ECG in detecting AF after ablation.

Trial registration: Clinical Trials Identifier: NCT03877913.

Keywords: Ablation; Atrial fibrillation; Holter ECG; Mobile ECG.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
The TTM recorder and the example of original recording with AF
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Patient flowchart
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Proportion of patients diagnosed with AF recurrences by TTM vs Holter monitoring
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Number of patients with AF recurrences detected only by TTM monitoring, only by Holter ECG, or by both methods
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
The Kaplan-Meier curves showing time to first AF recurrence detected by TTM recorder and Holter
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Details on timing and AF burden in 14 patients with AF recurrences. AF burden in TTM recordings represented as percent of recordings with AF per month and AF burden in Holter ECG recordings represented as percent in AF out of 6-day Holter ECG. Recurrences recorded by TTM enshadowed in light grey color and recorded by Holter ECG, in black. *Patients with redo procedure during follow-up

References

    1. Calkins H, et al. 2017 HRS/EHRA/ECAS/APHRS/SOLAECE expert consensus statement on catheter and surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation. Eur. Eur. Pacing Arrhythm. Card. Electrophysiol. J. Work. Groups Card. Pacing Arrhythm. Card. Cell. Electrophysiol. Eur. Soc. Cardiol. 2018;20(1):e1–e160. doi: 10.1093/europace/eux274.
    1. B. Krzowski et al., “Kardia Mobile and ISTEL HR applicability in clinical practice: a comparison of Kardia Mobile, ISTEL HR, and standard 12-lead electrocardiogram records in 98 consecutive patients of a tertiary cardiovascular care centre,” Eur. Heart J. - Digit. Health, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 467–476, Sep. 2021, doi: 10.1093/ehjdh/ztab040.
    1. J. P. J. Halcox et al., “Assessment of remote heart rhythm sampling using the AliveCor heart monitor to screen for atrial fibrillation: The REHEARSE-AF Study,” Circulation, vol. 136, no. 19, pp. 1784–1794, Nov. 2017, doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.117.030583.
    1. T. Kimura et al., “Assessment of atrial fibrillation ablation outcomes with clinic ECG, monthly 24-h Holter ECG, and twice-daily telemonitoring ECG,” Heart Vessels, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 317–325, Mar. 2017, doi: 10.1007/s00380-016-0866-2.
    1. G. Senatore et al., “Role of transtelephonic electrocardiographic monitoring in detecting short-term arrhythmia recurrences after radiofrequency ablation in patients with atrial fibrillation,” J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., vol. 45, no. 6, pp. 873–876, Mar. 2005, doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2004.11.050.
    1. K. T Hickey et al., “Evaluating the utility of mHealth ECG heart monitoring for the detection and management of atrial fibrillation in clinical practice,” J. Atr. Fibrillation, vol. 9, no. 5, p. 1546, Mar. 2017, doi: 10.4022/jafib.1546.
    1. A. N. L. Hermans et al., “Long-term intermittent versus short continuous heart rhythm monitoring for the detection of atrial fibrillation recurrences after catheter ablation,” Int. J. Cardiol., vol. 329, pp. 105–112, Apr. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2020.12.077.
    1. Chovancik J, et al. Comparison of two modes of long-term ECG monitoring to assess the efficacy of catheter ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. Biomed. Pap. Med. Fac. Univ. Palacky Olomouc Czechoslov. 2019;163(1):54–60. doi: 10.5507/bp.2018.031.
    1. G. Hindricks et al., “2020 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of atrial fibrillation developed in collaboration with the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS): The Task Force for the diagnosis and management of atrial fibrillation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) developed with the special contribution of the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) of the ESC,” Eur. Heart J., vol. 42, no. 5, pp. 373–498, Feb. 2021, doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehaa612.
    1. S. Conti et al., “Effect of postablation monitoring strategy on long-term outcome for catheter ablation of persistent atrial fibrillation: a substudy of the STAR AF II Trial,” Circ. Arrhythm. Electrophysiol., vol. 13, no. 11, p. e008682, Nov. 2020, doi: 10.1161/CIRCEP.120.008682.
    1. N. Dagres et al., :“Influence of the duration of Holter monitoring on the detection of arrhythmia recurrences after catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: implications for patient follow-up,” Int. J. Cardiol., vol. 139, no. 3, pp. 305–306, Mar. 2010, doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2008.10.004.
    1. A. Kusiak et al., “Diagnostic value of implantable loop recorder in patients undergoing cryoballoon ablation of atrial fibrillation,” Ann. Noninvasive Electrocardiol. Off. J. Int. Soc. Holter Noninvasive Electrocardiol. Inc, vol. 25, no. 4, p. e12733, Jul. 2020, doi: 10.1111/anec.12733.
    1. D.-Y. Yang et al., “Noninvasive electrocardiography monitoring for very early recurrence predicts long-term outcome in patients after atrial fibrillation ablation,” Ann. Noninvasive Electrocardiol. Off. J. Int. Soc. Holter Noninvasive Electrocardiol. Inc, vol. 25, no. 6, p. e12785, Nov. 2020, doi: 10.1111/anec.12785.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorer og samarbeidspartnere

Medisinsk tilstand

Legemiddelintervensjoner

3
Abonnere