Background/objectives. Symptoms suggestive of cardiac arrhythmias are a challenge to the diagnosis. Physical examination and a 12-lead ECG are of limited value, as rhythm disturbances are frequently of a paroxysmal nature. New technologies facilitate a more accurate diagnosis. The objective of this study was to review the medical literature in an effort to define a guide to rational diagnostic testing.
Methods. Primary studies on the use of a diagnostic tool in the evaluation of palpitations were searched in MEDLINE, and EMBASE with an additional reference check.
Results. Two types of studies were found: descriptive and experimental studies, which compared the yield of two or more devices or diagnostic strategies. Holter monitors seemed to have less diagnostic yield (33 to 35%) than event recorders. Automatically triggered recorders detect more arrhythmias (72 to 80%) than patient-triggered devices (17 to 75%). Implantable devices are used for prolonged monitoring periods in patients with infrequent symptoms or unexplained syncope.
Conclusion. The choice of the device depends on the characteristics of the symptoms and the patient. Due to methodological shortcomings of the included studies no evidence-based diagnostic strategy can be proposed. (Neth Heart J 2010;18:543–51.)
Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten
Rutjes AW, Reitsma JB, Coomarasamy A, Khan KS, Bossuyt PMM. Evaluation of diagnostic tests when there is no gold standard. A review of methods. Health Technol Assess. 2007;11(:iii,iv–51).
Glasziou P, Irwig L, Deeks JJ. When should a new test become the current reference standard? Ann Intern Med. 2008; 149:816–821. PubMed
Eriksson L, Pahlm O The clinical impact of long-term ECG recording. A retrospective study of 150 patients. Acta Medica Scand. 1980;208:355–358. CrossRef
Rana MZ, Dunstan EJ, Allen SC. Ambulatory electrocardiography in elderly: an audit. Br J Clin Pract. 1989;43:341–342. PubMed
McClennen S, Zimetbaum PJ, Ho KKL, Goldberger AL. Holtermonitoring: are two days better than one? Am J Cardiol. 2000;869:562–564. CrossRef
Assayag P, Chailley O, Lehner JP, Brochet E, Demange J, Rezvani Y, et al. (Contribution of sequential voluntary ambulatory monitoring in the diagnosis of arhythmia. A multicenter study of 1287 symtomatic patients). Arch Mal Coeur Vaiss. 1992;85:281–286. PubMed
Zimetbaum PJ, Kim KY, Josephson ME, Goldberger AL, Cohen DJ. Diagnostic yield and optimal duration of continuousloop event monitoring for the diagnosis of palpitations. A costeffectiveness analysis. Ann Intern Med. 1998;128:890–895. PubMed
Wu C-C, Hsieh M-H, Tai C-T, Chiang C-E, Yu W-C, Lin Y-K, et al. Utility of patient-activated cardiac event recorders in the detection of cardiac arrhythmias. Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiol. 2003;8:117–120. CrossRef
Visser J, Schuilenburg RM. Trans-telephonic ECG monitoring in the diagnosis of cardiac arrhythmias: A comparison with Holter electrocardiography. Ned Tijdschrift Geneeskund. 1984;128:397–401.
Kus T, Nadeau R, Costi P, Molin F, Primeau R. Comparison of the diagnostic yield of Holter versus transtelephonic monitoring. Can J Cardiol. 1995;11:891–894. PubMed
Kinlay S, Leitch JW, Neil A, Chapman BL, Hardy DB, Fletcher PJ. Cardiac event recorders yield more diagnoses and are more cost-effective than 48-hour Holter monitoring in patients with palpitations. A controlled clinical trial. Ann Intern Med. 1996;124(1 Pt 1):16–20. PubMed
Rothman SA, Laughlin JC, Seltzer J, Walia JS, Baman RI, Siouffi SY et al. The diagnosis of cardiac arrhythmias: a prospective multi-center randomized study comparing mobile cardiac outpatient telemetry versus standard loop event monitoring. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2007;18:241–247. PubMedCrossRef
- Efficacy of diagnostic tools for detecting cardiac arrhythmias: systematic literature search
H.C.P.M. van Weert
- Bohn Stafleu van Loghum
Neu im Fachgebiet Kardiologie
Mail Icon II