» Articles » PMID: 37038759

Ability to Remotely Monitor Atrial High-rate Episodes Using a Single-chamber Implantable Cardioverter-defibrillator with a Floating Atrial Sensing Dipole

Abstract

Aims: To allow timely initiation of anticoagulation therapy for the prevention of stroke, the European guidelines on atrial fibrillation (AF) recommend remote monitoring (RM) of device-detected atrial high-rate episodes (AHREs) and progression of arrhythmia duration along pre-specified strata (6 min…<1 h, 1 h…<24 h, ≥ 24 h). We used the MATRIX registry data to assess the capability of a single-lead implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) with atrial sensing dipole (DX ICD system) to follow this recommendation in patients with standard indication for single-chamber ICD.

Methods And Results: In 1841 DX ICD patients with daily automatic RM transmissions, electrograms of first device-detected AHREs per patient in each duration stratum were adjudicated, and the corresponding positive predictive values (PPVs) for the detections to be true atrial arrhythmia were calculated. Moreover, the incidence and progression of new-onset AF was assessed in 1451 patients with no AF history. A total of 610 AHREs ≥6 min were adjudicated. The PPV was 95.1% (271 of 285) for episodes 6min…<1 h, 99.6% (253/254) for episodes 1 h…<24 h, 100% (71/71) for episodes ≥24 h, or 97.5% for all episodes (595/610). The incidence of new-onset AF was 8.2% (119/1451), and in 31.1% of them (37/119), new-onset AF progressed to a higher duration stratum. Nearly 80% of new-onset AF patients had high CHA2DS2-VASc stroke risk, and 70% were not on anticoagulation therapy. Age was the only significant predictor of new-onset AF.

Conclusion: A 99.7% detection accuracy for AHRE ≥1 h in patients with DX ICD systems in combination with daily RM allows a reliable guideline-recommended screening for subclinical AF and monitoring of AF-duration progression.

Citing Articles

Arrhythmia Detection in Atrioventricular, Single-Lead, Floating Atrial Dipole ICD Systems Compared with Conventional Single- and Dual-Chamber Defibrillators.

Gausz F, Lena K, Gedeon P, Miklos M, Benak A, Bencsik G J Cardiovasc Dev Dis. 2024; 11(12).

PMID: 39728276 PMC: 11677019. DOI: 10.3390/jcdd11120386.


A prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial comparing VDD-ICD with VVI-ICD in detecting subclinical atrial fibrillation in patients with ICDs: The Dx-AF trial.

Shurrab M, Janmohamed A, Ayala-Paredes F, Sturmer M, Toal S, Sarrazin J Heart Rhythm O2. 2024; 5(9):668-671.

PMID: 39493910 PMC: 11524949. DOI: 10.1016/j.hroo.2024.07.014.

References
1.
Zeitler E, Sanders G, Singh K, Greenfield R, Gillis A, Wilkoff B . Single vs. dual chamber implantable cardioverter-defibrillators or programming of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in patients without a bradycardia pacing indication: systematic review and meta-analysis. Europace. 2018; 20(10):1621-1629. PMC: 6182310. DOI: 10.1093/europace/euy183. View

2.
Dewland T, Pellegrini C, Wang Y, Marcus G, Keung E, Varosy P . Dual-chamber implantable cardioverter-defibrillator selection is associated with increased complication rates and mortality among patients enrolled in the NCDR implantable cardioverter-defibrillator registry. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011; 58(10):1007-13. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2011.04.039. View

3.
Safak E, Schmitz D, Konorza T, Wende C, Olague de Ros J, Schirdewan A . Clinical efficacy and safety of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator lead with a floating atrial sensing dipole. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2013; 36(8):952-62. DOI: 10.1111/pace.12171. View

4.
Boriani G, Glotzer T, Ziegler P, de Melis M, Mangoni di S Stefano L, Sepsi M . Detection of new atrial fibrillation in patients with cardiac implanted electronic devices and factors associated with transition to higher device-detected atrial fibrillation burden. Heart Rhythm. 2017; 15(3):376-383. DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2017.11.007. View

5.
Kirchhof P, Benussi S, Kotecha D, Ahlsson A, Atar D, Casadei B . 2016 ESC Guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation developed in collaboration with EACTS. Europace. 2016; 18(11):1609-1678. DOI: 10.1093/europace/euw295. View