Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE · 2012
Use of a noninvasive continuous monitoring device in the management of atrial fibrillation: a pilot study.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Rosenberg Michael A, Samuel Michelle, Thosani Amit, Zimetbaum Peter J
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Outpatient ambulatory cardiac rhythm monitoring is a routine part of the management of patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF). Current systems are limited by patient convenience and practicality.
METHODS: We compared the Zio(®) Patch, a single-use, noninvasive waterproof long-term continuous monitoring patch, with a 24-hour Holter monitor in 74 consecutive patients with paroxysmal AF referred for Holter monitoring for detection of arrhythmias.
RESULTS: The Zio(®) Patch was well tolerated, with a mean monitoring period of 10.8 ± 2.8 days (range 4-14 days). Over a 24-hour period, there was excellent agreement between the Zio(®) Patch and Holter for identifying AF events and estimating AF burden. Although there was no difference in AF burden estimated by the Zio(®) Patch and the Holter monitor, AF events were identified in 18 additional individuals, and the documented pattern of AF (persistent or paroxysmal) changed in 21 patients after Zio(®) Patch monitoring. Other clinically relevant cardiac events recorded on the Zio(®) Patch after the first 24 hours of monitoring, including symptomatic ventricular pauses, prompted referrals for pacemaker placement or changes in medications. As a result of the findings from the Zio(®) Patch, 28.4% of patients had a change in their clinical management.
CONCLUSIONS: The Zio(®) Patch was well tolerated, and allowed significantly longer continuous monitoring than a Holter, resulting in an improvement in clinical accuracy, the detection of potentially malignant arrhythmias, and a meaningful change in clinical management. Further studies are necessary to examine the long-term impact of the use of the Zio(®) Patch in AF management.
METHODS: We compared the Zio(®) Patch, a single-use, noninvasive waterproof long-term continuous monitoring patch, with a 24-hour Holter monitor in 74 consecutive patients with paroxysmal AF referred for Holter monitoring for detection of arrhythmias.
RESULTS: The Zio(®) Patch was well tolerated, with a mean monitoring period of 10.8 ± 2.8 days (range 4-14 days). Over a 24-hour period, there was excellent agreement between the Zio(®) Patch and Holter for identifying AF events and estimating AF burden. Although there was no difference in AF burden estimated by the Zio(®) Patch and the Holter monitor, AF events were identified in 18 additional individuals, and the documented pattern of AF (persistent or paroxysmal) changed in 21 patients after Zio(®) Patch monitoring. Other clinically relevant cardiac events recorded on the Zio(®) Patch after the first 24 hours of monitoring, including symptomatic ventricular pauses, prompted referrals for pacemaker placement or changes in medications. As a result of the findings from the Zio(®) Patch, 28.4% of patients had a change in their clinical management.
CONCLUSIONS: The Zio(®) Patch was well tolerated, and allowed significantly longer continuous monitoring than a Holter, resulting in an improvement in clinical accuracy, the detection of potentially malignant arrhythmias, and a meaningful change in clinical management. Further studies are necessary to examine the long-term impact of the use of the Zio(®) Patch in AF management.