ArticleAmerican heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice2026
Evaluation of palpitations in pregnancy using an ambulatory event monitor.
Article in American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Palpitations are a common complaint in pregnancy, yet the clinical significance and diagnostic utility of ambulatory cardiac monitoring in this population remain unclear. Methods: This single-center retrospective study included 111 pregnant patients referred to an obstetric cardiology clinic for palpitations. Demographic and clinical characteristics, echocardiographic findings, and ambulatory event monitor data were analyzed. The primary outcome was arrhythmia detection, with secondary outcomes including medical management changes and maternal and fetal outcomes. Results: Of the 111 patients, 61 (55%) underwent ambulatory cardiac monitoring, with arrhythmias detected in 28 (46%) of those monitored. Symptom correlation with rhythm abnormalities was documented in 13 (46%) patients with arrhythmia. Beta-blockers were initiated or continued in 7 (25%) patients with detected arrhythmia, but this was not statistically different from patients without arrhythmia. There was no significant association between arrhythmia detection and patient age, gravidity, gestational age, or prior history of arrhythmia or valvular disease. Speckle tracking echocardiography was performed in 25 patients (28.7%), and global longitudinal strain (GLS) did not significantly correlate with arrhythmia detection (-12.6 ± 10 vs. -15.6 ± 9; Kendall's tau = 0.08, Conclusions: Symptom-guided ambulatory monitoring in pregnancy identified clinically relevant arrhythmias in a subset of patients, including those without prior cardiac history. While this occasionally influenced management, the therapeutic yield was modest. These findings support a selective monitoring approach and emphasize the need for larger studies to identify patients most likely to benefit.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.