To explore the efficacy of the long term dynamic electrocardiogram monitoring device in patients with suspected atrial fibrillation (AF). Ambulatory cardiac rhythm monitoring is a routine part of the management of patients with paroxysmal AF.Current systems are limited by patient convenience and practicality.

From 1st January 2016 to 31th March 2017, 71 cases with suspected AF[aged(49.35±17.27)years, 39 males] treated in our hospital were enrolled.We compared the SmartPatch, a single-use, noninvasive waterproof very long-term continuous monitoring patch, with a 24 h Holter monitor in 71 consecutive patients with paroxysmal AF referred for detection of AF. The detection rate, AF burdon and types of AF were also compared.

A total of 26 and 8 cases were detected as AF using SmartPatch and Holter respectively.The AF detection rate of SmartPatch and Holter was significantly different (37.7% vs.11.6%, P<0.0001). Overall, among the patients with any AF during the study, there was good correlation between the AF burden estimated by the SmartPatch and Holter(r=0.79, P<0.0001). The clinical classification of the AF pattern changed as a result of wearing the SmartPatch in 25 (96%) AF patients, although in general there was agreement between the two devices (kappa=0.18±0.08, P<0.01).

The SmartPatch allowed significantly longer continuous monitoring than a Holter, resulting in an improvement in the detection of potentially AF and a meaningful change in clinical AF management.

Atrial firillation; Arrhythmias; Dynamic electrocardiogram monitoring