Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42302092›Full record

Observational studyJournal of cardiovascular electrophysiology2026

Comparative Efficacy of Continuous Versus Patch ECG Monitoring in Detecting Atrial Fibrillation Recurrence Post Catheter Ablation: Insights From the REAL-AF Registry.

Chinmaya Mareddy, Yashendra Sethi, Gurpreet Johal, Manasvi Gupta, Joshua Silverstein, Amit Thosani, Paul Zei, Linda Justice, Susan M Bezenek, Jorge Romero and 15 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyObservational Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04088071 (Real-world Experience of Catheter Ablation for the Treatment of Arrhythmias Symptomatic Using Novel CARTO Technologies), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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.

NCT04088071 recruitingnot on this map

Real-world Experience of Catheter Ablation for the Treatment of Arrhythmias Symptomatic Using Novel CARTO Technologies: REAL Registry

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorHeart Rhythm Clinical and Research Solutions, LLCRan2018 to 2028Enrolled20,000ConditionsParoxysmal Atrial Fibrillation, Persistent Atrial Fibrillation, Ventricular ArrhythmiaArmsCatheter ablation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Observational
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

25 authors.

Chinmaya MareddyCentra Heart and Vascular Institute, Lynchburg, Virginia, USA.
Yashendra SethiPearResearch, Dehradun, India.ORCID 0000-0003-0345-3876
Gurpreet JohalValley Medical Center, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Manasvi GuptaAllegheny Health Network, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.
Joshua SilversteinAllegheny Health Network, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.
Amit ThosaniAllegheny Health Network, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.
Paul ZeiCardiac Arrhythmia Service, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Linda JusticeHeart Rhythm Clinical and Research Solutions, (HRCRS), LLC., Burmingham, Alabama, USA.
Susan M BezenekHeart Rhythm Clinical and Research Solutions, (HRCRS), LLC., Burmingham, Alabama, USA.ORCID 0009-0002-6367-016X
Jorge RomeroCardiac Arrhythmia Service, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Mohammad Al JazayeriTrinity Health Michigan Heart-Ann Arbor Campus, Ypsilanti, Michigan, USA.
Saumil OzaAscension St. Vincent's Cardiology, Jacksonville, Florida, USA.
Matthew J SingletonWellSpan Health, York, Pennsylvania, USA.
Charles TeOklahoma Heart Hospital, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, USA.
Matthew SellersBon Secour St. Francis Hospital, Greenville, South Carolina, USA.
Jordan Leyton MangeMaine Health Cardiology, Scarborough, Maine, USA.
Sandeep BansalLancaster General Hospital, Lancasater, Pennsylvania, USA.
Huy PhanValley Heart Rhythm Specialists, Chandler, Arizona, USA.
Nicholas CostaNovant Health System, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, USA.
Matthew SackettCentra Heart and Vascular Institute, Lynchburg, Virginia, USA.
Jose SilvaCentra Heart and Vascular Institute, Lynchburg, Virginia, USA.
Julia McHughCentra Heart and Vascular Institute, Lynchburg, Virginia, USA.
Rich KukCentra Heart and Vascular Institute, Lynchburg, Virginia, USA.
Daniela Hincapie-TabaresCardiac Arrhythmia Service, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Jose OsorioHCA Florida Miami, Miami, Florida, USA.

Funding

Johnson and Johnson
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEffective monitoring of atrial fibrillation (AF) recurrence following catheter ablation is crucial for optimizing patient outcomes. Various monitoring strategies exist, but effectiveness comparisons remain underexplored.

objectiveThis study compares the recurrence of atrial arrhythmias detected by continuous versus patch ECG monitoring methods following radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for AF.

methodsReal-world data from the REAL-AF Registry (NCT04088071) were analyzed. REAL-AF is a prospective, observational, multicenter registry and this analysis included patients with available 12-month follow-up post-RFA. We compared the detected recurrence rates of all-atrial arrhythmias from continuous monitoring insertable cardiac monitors (ICMs), dual-chamber pacemakers, and implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICDs) or from patch ECG monitoring for 7-14-days.

resultsOut of 2263 patients, 688 (30.4%) were monitored continuously, and 1575 (69.6%) were monitored with patch ECGs. The detected recurrence rate of all atrial arrhythmias was significantly higher in the continuous monitoring group compared to the patch monitoring group at 12 months (28.1% and 13.5%, p < 0.001, respectively). This difference remained significant after adjusting for confounding factors such as age, type of AF, CHA

conclusionContinuous monitoring is associated with a higher detection rate of atrial arrhythmia recurrences following AF catheter ablation. These findings suggest that continuous monitoring should be considered the standard of care, especially in evaluating new ablation strategies and technologies.

Indexed as

Atrial FibrillationCatheter AblationElectrocardiography, AmbulatoryHeart RateAction PotentialsAgedDefibrillators, ImplantableFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsProspective StudiesRecurrenceRegistriesRisk Factorsarrhythmia recurrenceatrial fibrillationcatheter ablationcontinuous monitoringpatch ECG

Identifiers

PMID42302092
PMCPMC13475166

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.