Journal of Chest Surgery

The Korean Society for Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery (대한심장혈관흉부외과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Evaluation of the Diagnostic Performance and Efficacy of Wearable Electrocardiogram Monitoring for Arrhythmia Detection after Cardiac Surgery

  • Seungji Hyun (Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Ajou University Hospital, Ajou University School of Medicine) ;
  • Seungwook Lee (Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Ajou University Hospital, Ajou University School of Medicine) ;
  • Yu Sun Hong (Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Ajou University Hospital, Ajou University School of Medicine) ;
  • Sang-hyun Lim (Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Ajou University Hospital, Ajou University School of Medicine) ;
  • Do Jung Kim (Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Ajou University Hospital, Ajou University School of Medicine)
  • Received : 2023.10.31
  • Accepted : 2023.12.26
  • Published : 2024.03.05
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background: Postoperative atrial fibrillation (A-fib) is a serious complication of cardiac surgery that is associated with increased mortality and morbidity. Traditional 24-hour Holter monitors have limitations, which have prompted the development of innovative wearable electrocardiogram (ECG) monitoring devices. This study assessed a patch-type wearable ECG device (MobiCARE-MC100) for monitoring A-fib in patients undergoing cardiac surgery and compared it with 24-hour Holter ECG monitoring. Methods: This was a single-center, prospective, investigator-initiated cohort study that included 39 patients who underwent cardiac surgery between July 2021 and June 2022. Patients underwent simultaneous monitoring with both conventional Holter and patchtype ECG devices for 24 hours. The Holter device was then removed, and patch-type monitoring continued for an additional 48 hours, to determine whether extended monitoring provided benefits in the detection of A-fib. Results: This 72-hour ECG monitoring study included 39 patients, with an average age of 62.2 years, comprising 29 men (74.4%) and 10 women (25.6%). In the initial 24 hours, both monitoring techniques identified the same number of paroxysmal A-fib in 7 out of 39 patients. After 24 hours of monitoring, during the additional 48-hour assessment using the patch-type ECG device, an increase in A-fib burden (9%→38%) was observed in 1 patient. Most patients reported no significant discomfort while using the MobiCARE device. Conclusion: In patients who underwent cardiac surgery, the mobiCARE device demonstrated diagnostic accuracy comparable to that of the conventional Holter monitoring system.

Keywords

References

  1. Greenberg JW, Lancaster TS, Schuessler RB, Melby SJ. Postoperative atrial fibrillation following cardiac surgery: a persistent complication. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2017;52:665-72. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejcts/ezx039
  2. Burrage PS, Low YH, Campbell NG, O'Brien B. New-onset atrial fibrillation in adult patients after cardiac surgery. Curr Anesthesiol Rep 2019;9:174-93. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40140-019-00321-4
  3. Shen J, Lall S, Zheng V, Buckley P, Damiano RJ Jr, Schuessler RB. The persistent problem of new-onset postoperative atrial fibrillation: a single-institution experience over two decades. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2011;141:559-70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtcvs.2010.03.011
  4. Melby SJ, George JF, Picone DJ, et al. A time-related parametric risk factor analysis for postoperative atrial fibrillation after heart surgery. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2015;149:886-92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtcvs.2014.11.032
  5. Villareal RP, Hariharan R, Liu BC, et al. Postoperative atrial fibrillation and mortality after coronary artery bypass surgery. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;43:742-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2003.11.023
  6. Echahidi N, Pibarot P, O'Hara G, Mathieu P. Mechanisms, prevention, and treatment of atrial fibrillation after cardiac surgery. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008;51:793-801. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2007.10.043
  7. Zimetbaum P, Goldman A. Ambulatory arrhythmia monitoring: choosing the right device. Circulation 2010;122:1629-36. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.109.925610
  8. Yenikomshian M, Jarvis J, Patton C, et al. Cardiac arrhythmia detection outcomes among patients monitored with the Zio patch system: a systematic literature review. Curr Med Res Opin 2019;35:1659-70. https://doi.org/10.1080/03007995.2019.1610370
  9. Jayakumar P, Lin E, Galea V, et al. Digital phenotyping and patient-generated health data for outcome measurement in surgical care: a scoping review. J Pers Med 2020;10:282. https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm10040282
  10. Mathew JP, Fontes ML, Tudor IC, et al. A multicenter risk index for atrial fibrillation after cardiac surgery. JAMA 2004;291:1720-9. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.291.14.1720
  11. Kwon S, Lee SR, Choi EK, et al. Comparison between the 24-hour Holter test and 72-hour single-lead electrocardiogram monitoring with an adhesive patch-type device for atrial fibrillation detection: prospective cohort study. J Med Internet Res 2022;24:e37970. https://doi.org/10.2196/37970
  12. Melduni RM, Schaff HV, Bailey KR, et al. Implications of new-onset atrial fibrillation after cardiac surgery on long-term prognosis: a community-based study. Am Heart J 2015;170:659-68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ahj.2015.06.015
  13. Okubo Y, Tokuyama T, Okamura S, et al. Evaluation of the feasibility and efficacy of a novel device for screening silent atrial fibrillation (MYBEAT Trial). Circ J 2022;86:182-8. https://doi.org/10.1253/circj.CJ-20-1061
  14. Sandberg EL, Halvorsen S, Berge T, et al. Fully digital self-screening for atrial fibrillation with patch electrocardiogram. Europace 2023;25:euad075. https://doi.org/10.1093/europace/euad075