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

J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2008 Jun;22(1):39-44. doi: 10.1007/s10840-008-9251-0. Epub 2008 Apr 3.

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.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Adult
  • Aged
  • Arrhythmias, Cardiac / diagnosis*
  • Electrocardiography, Ambulatory / instrumentation*
  • Equipment Design
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Patient Compliance
  • Patient Satisfaction