A novel cross-sector telemedical approach to detect arrhythmia in primary care patients with palpitations using a patient-activated event recorder

Background: Patient-activated event recorders (ER) can facilitate diagnosis in unclear palpi­tations, however impact of ER screening on further treatment in clinical routine is unknown. We investigated the feasibility and clinical value of a network-based telemetric monitoring using a patient activated ER. Methods: The network consisted of 12 general practitioners (GP) and a department of car­diology (DC). GP-patients sent electrocardiograms (ECGs) twice daily and in case of palpitations. ECGs were transferred by email to GP and DC and analyzed independently by both. The therapeutic strategy was discussed between GP and DC. The monitoring period ended after 4 weeks or in case of detected arrhythmia. Results: A group of 184 consecutive patients were retrospectively analyzed. Mean age was 57.5 ± 14.4 years (range 17–82), 104 (56.5%) were female. Significant arrhythmia occurred in 71 (38.5%) patients: Recurrence of known paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF; n = 27, 14.7%), de novo AF (n = 19, 10.3%), premature complexes/bigeminus (n = 13, 7.1%), sinus tachycar­dia (n = 7, 3.8%), atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia (n = 3, 1.6%), and ventricular tachycardia (n = 2, 1.1%). A therapeutic consequence resulted in 63 (88.7%) patients with de­tected arrhythmia: new oral anticoagulation (n = 29, 40.8%), new antiarrhythmic medication (n = 27, 38.0%), behavioral intervention (n = 19, 26.8%), electrophysiology-study/catheter ablation (n = 4, 5.6%), cardioversion (n = 2, 2.8%), implantable cardioverter-defibrillator- -implantation (n = 1, 1.4%), and left atrial appendage occluder (n = 1, 1.4%). Conclusions: The investigated cross-sector telemetric network is a feasible approach to detect arrhythmia in patients with palpitations and may have high impact on further treatment, notably in those at risk for stroke due to AF

Deactivation vs. asynchronous pacing - prospective evaluation of a protocol for rhythm management in patients with magnetic resonance conditional pacemakers undergoing adenosine stress cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging

Abstract Background Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (CMR) imaging with adenosine stress is an important diagnostic tool in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease (CAD). However, the method is not yet established for CAD patients with pacemakers (PM) in clinical practice. A possible reason is that no recommendations exist for PM setting (paused pacing or asynchronous mode) during adenosine stress. We elaborated a protocol for rhythm management in clinical routine for PM patients that considers heart rate changes under adenosine using a test infusion of adenosine in selected patients. Methods 47 consecutive patients (mean age 72.3 ± 10,0 years) with MR conditional PM and known or suspected CAD who underwent CMR in clinical routine were studied in this prospective observational study. PM indications were sinus node dysfunction (SND, n = 19; 40,4%), atrioventricular (AV) block (n = 26; 55.3%) and bradyarrhythmia in permanent atrial fibrillation (AF, n = 2; 4.3%). In patients with SND, normal AV-conduction and resting HR >45 bpm at the time of CMR and in AF the PM was deactivated for the scan. In intermittent AV-block a test infusion of adenosine was given prior to the scan. All patients with permanent higher degree sinuatrial or AV-block or deterioration of AV-conduction in the adenosine test were paced asynchronously during CMR, in patients with preserved AV-conduction under adenosine the pacemaker was deactivated. CMR protocol included cine imaging, adenosine stress perfusion and late gadolinium enhancement. Results The adenosine test was able to differentiate between mandatory PM stimulation during CMR and safe deactivation of the device. In patients with permanent sinuatrial or AV-block (n = 11; 23.4%) or deterioration of AV conduction in the adenosine test (n = 5, 10.6%) asynchronous pacing above resting heart rate did not interfere with intrinsic rhythm, no competitive stimulation was seen during the scan. 10 of 15 (66,7%) patients with intermittent AV-block showed preserved AV-conduction under adenosine. As in SND and AF deactivation of the PM showed to be safe during CMR, no bradycardia was observed. Conclusion Our protocol for rhythm management during adenosine stress CMR showed to be feasible and safe and may be recommended for pacemaker patients undergoing routine CMR