Comparison of a portable electrocardiographic home monitor device and conventional 24 h holter during the follow-up of the patient after atrial fibrillation ablation

Cai Cheng,Yang Gang,Sun Guozhen,Wang Lin,Yang Bing,Zhang Fengxiang,Ju Weizhu,Chen Hongwu,Li Mingfang,Gu Kai,Chen Ming-long

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.1007-6638.2017.04.016

2017-01-01

Abstract:Objective This study was to test the efficacy of a portable electrocardiographic home monitor device(snapECG) in monitoring the patients after atrial fibrillation(AF) ablation procedure,to compare with a conventional 24 h holter,and also to assess patients' compliance.Methods Fifty-two patients referred for evaluation of cardiac arrhythmia within 12 months after AF ablation with a conventional 24 h holter monitor and snapECG.Pairedχ2 test was used to assess the agreement of these two follow-up methods.Sensitivity,accuracy and negative predictive value of both methods for the detection of atrial arrhythmia were calculated.One hundred and seventy-five questionnaires were surveyed to evaluate the compliance of 24 h holter and snapECG.Results A total of 169 24 h holter reports and 1 218 episodes of snapECG recordings were obtained.The incidence of atrial arrhythmia were 20.4％ and 46.3％ according to holter and snapECG,respectively(P=0.004).The sensitivity,accuracy and negative predictive value were higher by snapECG monitor than by conventional 24 h holter.The results of questionnaire revealed that the feasibility and compliance of snapECG were better than 24 h holter.Conclusion The efficacy of snapECG in monitoring patients after AF ablation were better than conventional 24 h holter and the feasibility,and compliance of snapECG were also better than conventional methods.