Cited by 45ECG Monitoring and AnalysisCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmiasCardiac Arrhythmias and Treatments

Prospective comparison of the diagnostic utility of a standard event monitor versus a ‘leadless’ portable ECG monitor in the evaluation of patients with palpitations

Scherr, Daniel, Dalal, Darshan, Henrikson, Charles A., Spragg, David D., Berger, Ronald D., Calkins, Hugh, Cheng, Alan·2008·Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology

Abstract

Introduction 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.Methods 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.Results 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).Conclusion 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.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10840-008-9251-0

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Event recorders or handheld patient-operated ECG systems improve the diagnosis of transient ECG changes in patients with palpitations.

    “Event recorders or handheld patient-operated ECG systems have been shown to improve the diagnosis of transient ECG changes in patients with palpitations.71,72”
  • In patients with daily or weekly symptoms, external loop recorders and event recorders have higher diagnostic value (66-83%) and better cost/effectiveness than Holter devices.

    “By contrast, in patients in whom the symptoms are quite frequent (i.e.daily or weekly), external loop recorders and event recorders have shown both a higher diagnostic value (66 -83%) and a better cost/effectiveness ratio than Holter devices.71,83”
  • In patients with symptoms of possible arrhythmic origin, mobile cardiac outpatient telemetry has higher diagnostic value than other external devices.

    “Finally, in patients with symptoms of possible arrhythmic origin, mobile cardiac outpatient telemetry has been seen to exhibit a higher diagnostic value than the other external devices.71,84,85”
  • A small percentage of patients with palpitations of unknown origin have major bradyarrhythmic disorders, such as severe sinus bradycardia and paroxysmal advanced atrioventricular block.

    “Finally, a small percentage of patients with palpitations of unknown origin have major bradyarrhythmic disorders, such as severe sinus bradycardia and paroxysmal advanced atrioventricular block.52,71”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Scherr, D., Dalal, D., Henrikson, C. A., Spragg, D. D., Berger, R. D., Calkins, H., & Cheng, A.
Affiliations
Johns Hopkins University (US)
Corresponding author
Cheng, Alan
Venue
Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology
Published
2008-04-03
Volume
22
Issue
1
Pages
39-44
ISSN
  • 1383-875X (ISSN-L)
  • 1572-8595
OpenAlex
W2164883545
Cited by
45
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 2
FWCI
1.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Johns Hopkins University
  • Omron Healthcare
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › ECG Monitoring and Analysis
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac Arrhythmias and Treatments
Keywords
palpitations, Holter monitoring, event monitors, medication adherence, arrhythmia detection, diagnostic yield
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Arrhythmias, Cardiac, Equipment Design, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Compliance, Electrocardiography, Ambulatory, Patient Satisfaction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review