The Role of Continuous Monitoring in Atrial Fibrillation Management

Abstract

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia and is strongly associated with stroke risk and a variety of cardiovascular conditions. AF early detection is of paramount importance, in order to define proper medical treatment. This can be challenging due to the often silent and intermittent nature of the rhythm disturbance. Long-term external ECG monitoring may be very helpful, but if less than fully continuous and of long duration it will be not reliable. For this reason continuous monitoring is of increased importance, and outcome measurements of AF treatment trials will be based on the AF burden detected by insertable cardiac monitors (ICM) or therapeutic devices such as pacemakers or ICDs, leading to the paradigm that the detection of AF in the presence of thromboembolic risk factors should be performed wherever possible in order to improve patients’ chances.

Disclosure
Professor A John Camm serves as advisor and speaker for Astra Zeneca, ChanRX, Gilead, Merck, Menarini, Otsuka, Sanofi, Servier, Xention, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Daiichi, Pfizer, Boston Scientific, Biotronik, Medtronic, St Jude Medical, Actelion, GlaxoSmithKline, InfoBionic, Incarda, Johnson and Johnson, Mitsubishi, Novartis, Takeda
Correspondence
A John Camm, Professor of Clinical Cardiology, Cardiac and Vascular Sciences, St George's University of London, Cranmer Terrace, London, SW17 0RE, UK E: jcamm@sgul.ac.uk
Support
The publication of this article is supported by an educational grant from Medtronic
Received date
24 March 2014
Accepted date
23 April 2014
Citation
Arrhythmia & Electrophysiology Review 2014;3(1):48-50
DOI
http://dx.doi.org/10.15420/articles/role-continuous-monitoring-atrial-fibrillation-management

Atrial Fibrillation (AF) is the most common sustained cardiac arrhythmia,occurring in 1–2 % of the general population and is increasingly prevalent in older people, occuring in about 10 % of over 80 year olds.1 AF isassociated with a variety of cardiovascular conditions. The arrhythmia is associated with a five-fold rise in stroke risk and frequently coexists with heart failure, both leading to a further increase in mortality.2–5

About 15 % of strokes are attributed to underlying AF, and 50–60 % to documented cerebrovascular disease, but in about 25 % of patients who have ischaemic strokes, no aetiological factor is identified. Subclinical atrial fibrillation is often suspected to be the cause of stroke in these patients.3,6–8 A recent study with implantable cardiac monitors in survivors of ischaemic stroke has revealed that far more than expected instances of so-called “cryptogenic stroke” are associated with episodes of AF revealed by continuous ECG monitoring.9,10 Concomitant medical conditions have an additive effect on the perpetuation of AF by promoting a substrate that maintains AF. Conditions associated with AF are also markers for global cardiovascular risk and/or cardiac damage rather than simply causative factors.11

Altogether, AF causes a significant economic burden which has grown in recent decades and is expected to grow even further in the future with the increasing trend in AF prevalence and hospitalisations.12–14

Asymptomatic AF and the Low Yield of Intermittent Monitoring
AF can show in several clinical scenarios. Some patients may suffer so much that they seek specialist help to be relieved from the arrhythmia.Others present with severe symptoms, often including fatigue and shortness of breath, and are found to be in AF on clinical or ECG examination. In yet others, AF is an incidental finding when an irregular heartbeat is detected on physical examination and/or an ECG is recorded for other reasons, such as during preoperative assessment. The problem of early recognition of AF is greatly aggravated by the often silent and intermittent nature of the rhythm disturbance. In about one third of patients with this arrhythmia, patients are not aware of the so-called asymptomatic AF.15,16

The Suppression of Paroxysmal Atrial Tachyarrhythmias (SOPAT)trial17 showed that only 46 % of episodes recorded during the oneyear follow-up period were associated with specific symptoms. The remaining 54 % were asymptomatic AF episodes. Similarly in the Prevention of Atrial Fibrillation After Cardioversion (PAFAC) trial18 70 % of all AF recurrences were completely asymptomatic. Arya et al19 used seven-day Holter recordings before ablation and documented AF in 81 % of the population. All episodes were symptomatic in 38 %. In 52 patients (57 %), symptomatic and asymptomatic episodes were recorded, whereas in 5 patients (5 %), all documented AF episodes were asymptomatic.

Ziegler et al.20compared continuous monitoring with different strategies of intermittent ECG monitoring in pacemaker patients. All intermittent and symptom-based monitoring resulted in significantly lower sensitivity (range 31–71 %) and negative predictive value (range 21–39 %) for the identification of patients with AF and underestimated AF burden. These results were confirmed by Botto et al.21

The Role of Monitoring in Rhythm Control Strategies
In order to measure efficacy of rhythm control approaches and therapeutic techniques, it is widely accepted that continuous information is needed, because spotlight ECGs miss a major part of the AF activity which may lead to a wrong evaluation of therapy efficacy.

The relevance of increasing the Holter observation length from 24 hours to seven days has been demonstrated by Kottkamp et al.22 One hundred patients underwent 24-hour and seven-day Holter monitoring post-pulmonary vein ablation for paroxysmal AF. At 12 months,ablation success rate was 88 % when using the 24-hour Holter data, but only 74 % as indicated by the seven-day Holter. One might argue that this gap in capturing recurrences outside a Holter registration interval could be closed if an external event recorder were used. However, Klemm and co-workers demonstrated that, in 80 post-ablation patients using transtelephonic ECG recordings (minimum one ECG per day and in case of symptoms suggesting AF), during 54 % of transmitted ECGs demonstrating AF patients were asymptomatic.23In 11 % of all tracings,the patients indicated symptoms but demonstrated stable sinus rhythm on the tracing. In line with this finding, it was demonstrated that, outside a blanking period of three months, the ablation success in patients with only symptomatic but ECG-documented recurrences was around 70 % whereas, counting all ECG-documented AF recurrences using a tele-ECG concept, the percentage of patients with no AF recurrences was reduced to almost 40 %.

Pokushalov and co-workers published for the first time the wide and routine use of an insertable cardiac monitor (ICM) to perform long-term continuous AF monitoring in their AF ablation patients. Furthermore, they tried to differentiate between sudden-onset and triggered-onset AF recurrence in order to tailor the treatment regimens for AF recurrences after the first catheter ablation.24,25It was shown that an ICM-detected AF urden of >4.5 % during the blanking period was a powerful predictor of ablation failure. This information and correlation could trigger early re-intervention in those patients, shortening the period of time until stable sinus rhythm is reached.26

Similarly to catheter ablation, in surgical procedures there is a relevant proportion of patients with silent and intermittent AF recurrences,whereas a significant number of symptomatic AF episodes are not related to AF. Ip and co-workers report that in about 45 AF patients, who underwent video-assisted epicardial ablation and ICM implantation; as many as 46 % of the AF recurrences were asymptomatic, whereas only 66 % of the symptomatic episodes were AF-related.27

Bogachev-Prokophiev et al.28 reported ablation results for AF with mitral valve surgery after one year of continuous monitoring. Fortyseven patients with mitral valve disease and long-standing persistent AF underwent a left atrial maze procedure with bipolar radiofrequency ablation and valve surgery. At the 12-months follow-up examination,65.2 % of patients had an AF burden <0.5 % and were classified as responders; 6.5 % of the non-responders had atrial flutter and 27.7 % had documented AF recurrences with an AF burden >0.5 %, and 4.3 % patients with AF recurrences were completely asymptomatic. Among the symptomatic events manually stored by the patients, only 27.6 % were confirmed as genuine AF recurrences according to the concomitant ECG recorded by the ICM. The results in these surgical AF patients again show the usefulness of continuous rhythm monitoring to verify the true amount of successful ablation therapy and to identify asymptomatic recurrences in order to better discriminate between AF and non-AF-related symptoms.

If an ICM is implanted for a period before the procedure, this may help the assessment of AF behaviour and improve patient management.In fact Verma et al.29 showed that the ratio of asymptomatic to symptomatic AF episodes increased from 1.1 before to 3.7 after ablation. In addition they demonstrated that the post-ablation state(rate of episodes) is the strongest predictor of asymptomatic AF,and symptoms alone underestimate post-ablation AF burden, with 12 % of patients having only asymptomatic recurrences. In addition Pedrote et al.30showed that the prevalence of AF prior to an ablation can be highly variable and often lower than expected; therefore postablation assessment without knowledge of the pre-ablation burden can overvalue or undervalue the success of the procedure.

The Role of Monitoring in the Risk Stratification for Stroke Prevention
If the risk of stroke is greater than approximately 1 % per annum,oral anticoagulation (OAC) is required for effective prevention of thromboembolic events, but in clinical practice with patients at moderate to high thromboembolic risk OAC is very oftenunderutilised.31,32

Current guidelines for stroke prevention in AF do not differentiate between patients with symptomatic or asymptomatic AF, or between paroxysmal or persistent AF.33 The vast majority of AF episodes are asymptomatic, including many episodes of clinically significant duration34

About 20–30 % of patients hospitalised for ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack are discharged with the diagnosis of cryptogenic stroke, meaning that the cause of the clinical event is not diagnosed.7,8Continuous monitoring with ICM is now widely used in patients with cryptogenic stroke to identify those with silent AF and drive the most appropriate antithrombotic therapy.35,36,37 In those studies AF was detected in 17–27.3 % of the patients in “real world” clinical practice underlining the limited yield of intermittent monitoring for secondary stroke prevention, where even the smallest amount of AF may play a role in stroke recurrence.38

Risk stratification for stroke prevention has been one of the most relevant issues debated by the medical community in recent years, and continuous monitoring now plays a pivotal role in this assessment. A series of studies performed in pacemaker or ICD patients indicate that longer times spent in AF are associated with a higher stroke risk, and that this increased risk is additional to known risk factors.21,39–41

Recently, the Asymptomatic Atrial Fibrillation and Stroke Evaluation in Pacemaker Patients and the Atrial Fibrillation Reduction Atrial Pacing Trial (ASSERT) included 2,580 patients aged 65 years or older, with hypertension and no history of AF, implanted with a pacemaker or ICD.42Episodes of subclinical atrial tachycardia occurred in 10 % of patients in the first three months and were associated with an increased risk of clinical AF (hazard ratio [HR] 5.56) and of ischaemic stroke or systemic embolism (HR 2.49). The conclusions of ASSERT were that subclinical atrial tachyarrhythmia occurs frequently and is associated with a significantly increased risk of ischaemic stroke or systemic embolism.

In addition a pooled analysis of individual patient data from three prospective studies, the Stroke Prevention Strategies based on Atrial Fibrillation Information from Implanted Devices (SOS AF) project, where more than 10,000 patients were included, evaluated several thresholds for daily AF burden and found that one hour of atrial fibrillation identified the highest thromboembolic risk (HR 2.11).43

Future Perspectives
Continuous AF monitoring has an increased importance, and outcome measurements of AF treatment trials, comparing rhythm versus rate control or different rhythms strategies, will now be based on the AF burden detected by ICM or therapeutic devices such as pacemakers or ICDs. Long-term external ECG monitoring may be very helpful but if less than fully continuous and of long duration will be less convincing than ICM data.

In the last few years it has become evident that it intermittent ECG documentation only captures a minority of the true AF burden.In the current clinical arena, especially in the field of rhythm control, correlation of symptoms and underlying rhythm is still considered relevant. However, different levels of AF burden captured by continuous monitoring will provide a more solid base for proper assessment and for correct stroke risk stratification.

Implantable long-term ECG monitors offer many advantages but require a change of paradigm focusing on a minimally invasive approach when compared to the current standard of care. It is certainly possible to envision wider adoption of the new, miniaturised,generation of ICMs that are being released; the insertion procedure is minimally invasive reducing to a minimum the burden for the patient and the treating physician, and allowing the possibility of extending its use to new categories of patients.

In any event the detection of AF in patients with thromboembolic risk factors should be performed wherever possible. Even short lasting AF episodes with a low AF burden imply a significant risk increase of thromboembolic risk; therefore any verified AF detection should trigger OAC prophylaxis as recommended.

References
  1. Kannel WB, Wolf PA, Benjamin EJ, Levy D. Prevalence, incidence, prognosis, and predisposing conditions for atrial fibrillation: population-based estimates. Am J Cardiol 1998;82:2N–9N.
    Crossref | PubMed
  2. Maisel WH, Stevenson LW. Atrial fibrillation in heart failure: epidemiology, pathophysiology, and rationale for therapy. Am J Cardiol 2003;91: 2D–8D.
    Crossref | PubMed
  3. Wolf PA, Dawber TR, Thomas HE Jr, Kannel WB. Epidemiologic assessment of chronic atrial fibrillation and risk of stroke: the Framingham study. Neurology 1978;28:973–7.
    Crossref | PubMed
  4. Wolf PA, Abbott RD, Kannel WB. Atrial fibrillation: a major contributor to stroke in the elderly. The Framingham Study. Arch Intern Med 1987;147:1561–4.
    Crossref | PubMed
  5. Wang TJ, Larson MG, Levy D, et al. Temporal relations of atrial fibrillation and congestive heart failure and their joint influence on mortality: the Framingham Heart Study. Circulation 2003;107:2920–5.
    Crossref | PubMed
  6. Petersen P, Godtfredson J. Embolic complications in paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. Stroke 1986;17:622–6.
    Crossref | PubMed
  7. Tayal AH, Tian KM, Kelly M, et al. Atrial fibrillation detected by mobile cardiac outpatient telemetry in cryptogenic TIA or stroke. Neurology 2008;71:1696–701.
    Crossref | PubMed
  8. Jabaudon D, Sztajzel J, Sievert K, et al. Usefulness of ambulatory 7-day ECG monitoring for the detection of atrial fibrillation and flutter after acute stroke and transient ischemic attack. Stroke 2004;35:1647–51.
    Crossref | PubMed
  9. Bernstein RA, Sanna T, Diener H-C, et al. Cryptogenic stroke and underlying atrial fibrillation (CRYSTAL AF). Abstract LB11. International Stroke Conference (ISC) 2014, San Diego, US.
    PubMed
  10. Sinha AM, Diener HC, Morillo CA, et al. Cryptogenic stroke and underlying atrial fibrillation (CRYSTAL AF): design and rationale. American Heart Journal 2010;160:36–41.
    Crossref | PubMed
  11. Camm AJ, Kirchhof P, Lip GY, et al. Guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation. The Task Force for the Management of Atrial Fibrillation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). European Heart Journal 2010;31:2369–429.
    Crossref | PubMed
  12. Stewart S, Murphy N, Walker A, et al. Cost of an emerging epidemic: an economic analysis of atrial fibrillation in the UK. Heart 2004;90:286–92.
    Crossref | PubMed
  13. Wattigney WA, Mensah GA, Croft JB. Increasing trends in hospitalization for atrial fibrillation in the United States, 1985 through 1999: implications for primary prevention. Circulation 2003;108:711–6,
    Crossref | PubMed
  14. Le Heuzey JY, Paziaud O, Piot O, et al. Cost of care distribution in atrial fibrillation patients: the COCAF study. Am Heart J 2004;147:121–6.
    Crossref | PubMed
  15. Ahmad Y, Kirchhof P. Gone fishing (for silent atrial fibrillation). Circulation 2013;127(8):870–2.
    Crossref | PubMed
  16. Camm AJ, Corbucci G, Padeletti L. Usefulness of continuous electrocardiographic monitoring for atrial fibrillation. Am J Cardiol 2012;110:270–6.
    Crossref | PubMed
  17. Patten M, Maas R, Karim A, et al. Event-recorder monitoring in the diagnosis of atrial fibrillation in symptomatic patients: subanalysis of the SOPAT trial. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2006;17:1–5.
    Crossref | PubMed
  18. Fetsch T, Bauer P, Engberding R, et al; Prevention of Atrial Fibrillation After Cardioversion Investigators. Prevention of atrial fibrillation after cardioversion: results of the PAFAC trial. Eur Heart J 2004;25:1385–94.
    Crossref | PubMed
  19. Arya A, Piorkowski C, Sommer P, et al. Clinical implications of various follow up strategies after catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2007;30:458–62.
    Crossref | PubMed
  20. Ziegler PD, Koehler JL, Mehra R. Comparison of continuous versus intermittent monitoring of atrial arrhythmias. Heart Rhythm 2006;3:1445–52.
    Crossref | PubMed
  21. Botto GL, Padeletti L, Santini M et al. Presence and duration of atrial fibrillation detected by continuous monitoring: crucial implications for the risk of thromboembolic events. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2009;20:241–8.
    Crossref | PubMed
  22. Kottkamp H, Tanner H, Kobza R, et al. Time courses and quantitative analysis of atrial fibrillation episode number and duration after circular plus linear left atrial lesions: trigger elimination or substrate modification: early or delayed cure? J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;44:869–77.
    Crossref
  23. Klemm HU, Ventura R, Rostock T, et al. Correlation of symptoms to ECG diagnosis following atrial fibrillation ablation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2006;17:146–50.
    Crossref | PubMed
  24. Pokushalov E, Romanov A, Corbucci G, et al. Ablation of paroxysmal and persistent atrial fibrillation: 1-year follow-up through continuous subcutaneous monitoring. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2011;22:369–75.
    Crossref | PubMed
  25. Pokushalov E, Romanov A, Corbucci G, et al. Use of an implantable monitor to detect arrhythmia recurrences and select patients for early repeat catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation: a pilot study. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol 2011;4:823–31.
    Crossref | PubMed
  26. Pokushalov E, Romanov A, Corbucci G, et al. Does atrial fibrillation burden measured by continuous monitoring during the blanking period predict the response to ablation at 12-month follow-up? Heart Rhythm 2012;9:1375–9.
    Crossref | PubMed
  27. Ip JH, Viqar-Syed M, Grimes D, et al. Surveillance of AF recurrence post-surgical AF ablation using implantable cardiac monitor. J Interv Card Electrophysiol 2012;33:77–83.
    Crossref | PubMed
  28. Bogachev-Prokophiev A, Zheleznev S, Romanov A, et al. Ablation for atrial fibrillation during mitral valve surgery: 1-year results through continuous subcutaneous monitoring. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 2012;15:37–41.
    Crossref | PubMed
  29. Verma A, Champagne J, Sapp J, et al. Discerning the incidence of symptomatic and asymptomatic episodes of atrial fibrillation before and after catheter ablation (DISCERN AF): a prospective, multicenter study. JAMA Internal Medicine 173:149–156.
    Crossref | PubMed
  30. Pedrote A, Arana-Rueda E, García-Riesco L et al. Paroxysmal atrial fibrillation burden before and after pulmonary veins isolation: an observational study through a subcutaneouslleadless cardiac monitor. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2013;24:1075–82.
    Crossref | PubMed
  31. Nieuwlaat R, Capucci A, Lip GY, et al. Antithrombotic treatment in real-life atrial fibrillation patients: a report from the Euro Heart Survey on Atrial Fibrillation. Eur Heart J 2006;27:3018–26.
    Crossref | PubMed
  32. Nieuwlaat R, Olsson SB, Lip GY, et al. Guideline-adherent antithrombotic treatment is associated with improved outcomes compared with undertreatment in high-risk patients with atrial fibrillation. The Euro Heart Survey on Atrial Fibrillation. Am Heart J 2007;153:1006–12.
    Crossref | PubMed
  33. European Heart Rhythm Association, European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, Camm AJ, Kirchhof P, Lip GY, et al. Guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation: the Task Force for the Management of Atrial Fibrillation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Europace 2010;12:1360–420.
    Crossref | PubMed
  34. Savelieva I, Camm AJ. Clinical relevance of silent atrial fibrillation: prevalence, prognosis, quality of life, and management. J Interv Card Electrophysiol 2000;4:369–82.
    PubMed
  35. Cotter PE, Martin PJ, Ring L, et al. Incidence of atrial fibrillation detected by implantable loop recorders in unexplained stroke. Neurology 2013;80:1546–50.
    Crossref | PubMed
  36. Etgen T, Hochreiter M, Mundel M, et al. Insertable cardiac event recorder in detection of atrial fibrillation after cryptogenic stroke an audit report. Stroke 2013;44:2007–9.
    Crossref | PubMed
  37. Ritter, Martin A., et al. Occult atrial fibrillation in cryptogenic stroke detection by 7-day electrocardiogram versus implantable cardiac monitors. Stroke 2013;44:1449–52.
    Crossref | PubMed
  38. Seet RC, Friedman PA, Rabinstein AA. Prolonged rhythm monitoring for the detection of occult paroxysmal atrial fibrillation in ischemic stroke of unknown cause. Circulation 2011;124:477–86.
    Crossref | PubMed
  39. Glotzer TV, Hellkamp AS, Zimmerman J, et al. Atrial high rate episodes detected by pacemaker diagnostics predict death and stroke: report of the Atrial Diagnostics Ancillary Study of the MOde Selection Trial (MOST). Circulation 2003;107:1614–9.
    Crossref | PubMed
  40. Capucci A, Santini M, Padeletti L, et al. Monitored atrial fibrillation duration predicts arterial embolic events in patients suffering from bradycardia and atrial fibrillation implanted with antitachycardia pacemakers. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005;46:1913–20.
    Crossref | PubMed
  41. Glotzer TV, Daoud EG, Wyse DG, et al. The relationship between daily atrial tachyarrhythmia burden from implantable device diagnostics and stroke risk: the TRENDS study. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol 2009;2:474–80.
    Crossref | PubMed
  42. Healey JS, Connolly SJ, Gold MR, et al. Subclinical atrial fibrillation and the risk of stroke. N Engl J Med 2012;366:120–9.
    Crossref | PubMed
  43. Boriani G, Glotzer TV, Santini M, et al. Device-detected atrial fibrillation and risk for stroke: an analysis of >10 000 patients from the SOS AF project (Stroke preventiOn Strategies based on Atrial Fibrillation information from implanted devices). Eur Heart J 2014;35:508-16.
    Crossref | PubMed