Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39705212›Full record

ArticlePLOS digital health2024

Does providing atrial fibrillation patients, after pulmonary vein isolation, with a 1-lead ECG device relieve the emergency department?-A historically controlled prospective trial.

Jasper L Selder, Mark J Mulder, Willem R van de Vijver, Philip M Croon, Leontine E Wentrup, Stéphanie L van der Pas, Jos W R Twisk, Igor I Tulevski, Albert C Van Rossum, Cornelis P Allaart

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLOS digital health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06283654 (Relieving the Emergency Department by Using a 1-lead ECG Device for Atrial Fibrillation Patients After Pulmonary Vein Isolation), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT06283654 completednot on this map

Relieving the Emergency Department by Using a 1-lead ECG Device for Atrial Fibrillation Patients After Pulmonary Vein Isolation: a Historically Controlled Prospective Trial

TypeobservationalSponsorAmsterdam UMC, location VUmcRan2018 to 2023Enrolled204ConditionsAtrial FibrillationArms1-lead ECG
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Jasper L SelderAmsterdam UMC, location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, department of Cardiology, Amsterdam Cardiovascular Sciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0777-491X
Mark J MulderAmsterdam UMC, location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, department of Cardiology, Amsterdam Cardiovascular Sciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6784-1064
Willem R van de VijverAmsterdam UMC, location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, department of Cardiology, Amsterdam Cardiovascular Sciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Philip M CroonAmsterdam UMC, location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, department of Cardiology, Amsterdam Cardiovascular Sciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4490-8857
Leontine E WentrupAmsterdam UMC, location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, department of Cardiology, Amsterdam Cardiovascular Sciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Stéphanie L van der PasAmsterdam UMC, location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Jos W R TwiskAmsterdam UMC, location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Igor I TulevskiCardiology Centers of the Netherlands, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Albert C Van RossumAmsterdam UMC, location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, department of Cardiology, Amsterdam Cardiovascular Sciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Cornelis P AllaartAmsterdam UMC, location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, department of Cardiology, Amsterdam Cardiovascular Sciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0506-9512

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a prevalent and clinically significant cardiac arrhythmia, with a growing incidence. The primary objectives in AF management are symptom relief, stroke risk reduction, and prevention of tachycardia-induced cardiomyopathy. Two key strategies for rhythm control include antiarrhythmic drug therapy and pulmonary vein isolation (PVI), with PVI being recommended for selected patients. Even though PVI is effective, post procedural health care utilization is high, contributing to emergency department (ED) overcrowding, which is a global healthcare concern. The use of remote rhythm diagnostics, such as a 1-lead ECG device (KM), may mitigate this issue by reducing ED visits and facilitating more plannable AF care.

objectiveThis study aimed to assess whether providing AF patients with a 1-lead ECG device for 1 year after PVI would reduce ED utilization compared to standard care. Additionally, the study assessed whether this intervention would render AF care more plannable by reducing the incidence of unplanned cardioversions.

methodsA historically controlled, prospective clinical trial was conducted. The intervention group were patients undergoing PVI for AF between September 2018 and August 2020, all patients in this group received a 1-lead ECG device for 1 year for remote rhythm monitoring. The historical control group were patients undergoing PVI between January 2016 and December 2017; these patients did not receive a 1-lead ECG device. Data on ED visits, planned and unplanned cardioversions, and outpatient contacts in the year after the PVI were collected for both groups.

resultsThe study included 204 patients, 123 in the 1-lead ECG group and 81 in the standard care group. There was no statistically significant difference in the number of all-cause ED visits (63 vs 68 per 100 pts, respectively, p = 0.72), ED visits for possible rhythm disorders, or ED visits for definite rhythm disorders between the two groups. However, the 1-lead ECG group demonstrated a higher proportion of planned cardioversions compared to unplanned ones (odds ratio 4.9 [1.57-15.85], p = 0.007).

conclusionProviding patients with AF following PVI with a 1-lead ECG device did not result in a statistically significant reduction in ED visits during the first year. However, it did improve the management of recurrent AF episodes by substituting unplanned cardioversions with scheduled ones. Clinical Trials Registration Number NCT06283654.

Identifiers

PMID39705212
PMCPMC11661629

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.