JMIR Publications

ABSTRACT

Background:

There is insufficient evidence for the use of single-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) monitoring with an adhesive patch-type device over an extended period compared to that of the 24-hour Holter test for atrial fibrillation (AF) detection.

Objective:

We aimed to compare AF detection by the 24-hour Holter test and 72-hour single-lead ECG monitoring using an adhesive patch-type ECG device (APD) among patients with AF.

Methods:

This was a prospective, single-center cohort study. A total of 210 patients with AF with clinical indications for the Holter test at cardiology outpatient clinics were enrolled in the study. The study participants were equipped with both the Holter device and APD for the first 24 hours. Subsequently, only the APD continued ECG monitoring for an additional 48 hours. AF detection during the first 24 hours was compared between the two devices. The diagnostic benefits of extended monitoring using the APD were evaluated.

Results:

A total of 200 patients (mean age 60.0 years; 70.5% male) completed 72-hour ECG monitoring with the APD. During the first 24 hours, both monitoring methods detected AF in the same 40/200 (20.0%) patients (including 20 patients each with paroxysmal and persistent AF). Compared to the 24-hour Holter test, the APD increased the AF detection rate by 1.5-fold (58/200; 29.0%) and 1.6-fold (64/200; 32.0%) with 48- and 72-hour monitoring, respectively. With the APD, the number of newly discovered patients with paroxysmal AF was 20/44 (45.5%), 18/44 (40.9%), and 6/44 (13.6%) at 24-, 48-, and 72-hour monitoring, respectively. Compared with 24-hour Holter monitoring, 72-hour monitoring with the APD increased the detection rate of paroxysmal AF by 2.2-fold (44/20).

Conclusions:

Compared to the 24-hour Holter test, AF detection could be improved with 72-hour single-lead ECG monitoring with the APD.