Reproducibility of drug efficacy predictions by Holter monitoring in the electrophysiologic study versus electrocardiographic monitoring (ESVEM) trial

Michael J. Reiter*, Labros A. Karagounis, David E. Mann, James A. Reiffel, Elizabeth Hahn, Vernon Hartz

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Selection of antiarrhythmic therapy may be based on suppression of spontaneous ventricular arrhythmias assessed by Holter monitoring, but the implications of discordant Holter results on repeat 24-hour monitoring has not been defined. This study examines the frequency and significance of reproducible Holter suppression on two 24-hour recordings in the Electrophysiologic Study Versus Electrocardiographic Monitoring (ESVEM) trial. Repeat 24-hour Holter monitoring was obtained in patients randomized to the Holter monitor limb of the ESVEM trial, during the same hospitalization, after a drug efficacy prediction. These Holters were not used to define drug efficacy but were subsequently analyzed to determine the reproducibility of drug efficacy predictions by Holter monitoring. A repeat 24-hour Holter monitor, following the one that predicted drug efficacy, was available in 119 patients. Ninety-nine patients (83%) also had suppression that met efficacy criteria on the second Holter monitor. There were no significant differences in arrhythmia recurrence (p = 0.612) or mortality (p = 0.638) in patients with concordant Holter results (n = 99; 1-year arrhythmia recurrence = 45%; 1-year mortality = 10%) compared with those with discordant Holter results (n = 20; 1-year arrhythmia recurrence = 45%; 1- yeor mortality = 16%). We conclude that (1) there is discordance between the first effective Holter monitor and a repeat Holter monitor in 17% of patients, and (2) suppression of ventricular ectopic activity on 2 separate 24-hour Holter monitors does not identify a group with a baiter outcome, nor does failure of suppression on the second Holter monitor identify a group with a worse prognosis.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)315-322
Number of pages8
JournalAmerican Journal of Cardiology
Volume79
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 1 1997

Fingerprint

Ambulatory Electrocardiography
Cardiac Arrhythmias
Pharmaceutical Preparations
Recurrence
Mortality
Hospitalization
Extremities

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

Reiter, Michael J. ; Karagounis, Labros A. ; Mann, David E. ; Reiffel, James A. ; Hahn, Elizabeth ; Hartz, Vernon. / Reproducibility of drug efficacy predictions by Holter monitoring in the electrophysiologic study versus electrocardiographic monitoring (ESVEM) trial. In: American Journal of Cardiology. 1997 ; Vol. 79, No. 3. pp. 315-322.
@article{76c747cdd88e4a70a5fcfe08c8cd7c87,
title = "Reproducibility of drug efficacy predictions by Holter monitoring in the electrophysiologic study versus electrocardiographic monitoring (ESVEM) trial",
abstract = "Selection of antiarrhythmic therapy may be based on suppression of spontaneous ventricular arrhythmias assessed by Holter monitoring, but the implications of discordant Holter results on repeat 24-hour monitoring has not been defined. This study examines the frequency and significance of reproducible Holter suppression on two 24-hour recordings in the Electrophysiologic Study Versus Electrocardiographic Monitoring (ESVEM) trial. Repeat 24-hour Holter monitoring was obtained in patients randomized to the Holter monitor limb of the ESVEM trial, during the same hospitalization, after a drug efficacy prediction. These Holters were not used to define drug efficacy but were subsequently analyzed to determine the reproducibility of drug efficacy predictions by Holter monitoring. A repeat 24-hour Holter monitor, following the one that predicted drug efficacy, was available in 119 patients. Ninety-nine patients (83{\%}) also had suppression that met efficacy criteria on the second Holter monitor. There were no significant differences in arrhythmia recurrence (p = 0.612) or mortality (p = 0.638) in patients with concordant Holter results (n = 99; 1-year arrhythmia recurrence = 45{\%}; 1-year mortality = 10{\%}) compared with those with discordant Holter results (n = 20; 1-year arrhythmia recurrence = 45{\%}; 1- yeor mortality = 16{\%}). We conclude that (1) there is discordance between the first effective Holter monitor and a repeat Holter monitor in 17{\%} of patients, and (2) suppression of ventricular ectopic activity on 2 separate 24-hour Holter monitors does not identify a group with a baiter outcome, nor does failure of suppression on the second Holter monitor identify a group with a worse prognosis.",
author = "Reiter, {Michael J.} and Karagounis, {Labros A.} and Mann, {David E.} and Reiffel, {James A.} and Elizabeth Hahn and Vernon Hartz",
year = "1997",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/S0002-9149(96)00754-0",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "79",
pages = "315--322",
journal = "American Journal of Cardiology",
issn = "0002-9149",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "3",

}

Reproducibility of drug efficacy predictions by Holter monitoring in the electrophysiologic study versus electrocardiographic monitoring (ESVEM) trial. / Reiter, Michael J.; Karagounis, Labros A.; Mann, David E.; Reiffel, James A.; Hahn, Elizabeth; Hartz, Vernon.

In: American Journal of Cardiology, Vol. 79, No. 3, 01.02.1997, p. 315-322.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Reproducibility of drug efficacy predictions by Holter monitoring in the electrophysiologic study versus electrocardiographic monitoring (ESVEM) trial

AU - Reiter, Michael J.

AU - Karagounis, Labros A.

AU - Mann, David E.

AU - Reiffel, James A.

AU - Hahn, Elizabeth

AU - Hartz, Vernon

PY - 1997/2/1

Y1 - 1997/2/1

N2 - Selection of antiarrhythmic therapy may be based on suppression of spontaneous ventricular arrhythmias assessed by Holter monitoring, but the implications of discordant Holter results on repeat 24-hour monitoring has not been defined. This study examines the frequency and significance of reproducible Holter suppression on two 24-hour recordings in the Electrophysiologic Study Versus Electrocardiographic Monitoring (ESVEM) trial. Repeat 24-hour Holter monitoring was obtained in patients randomized to the Holter monitor limb of the ESVEM trial, during the same hospitalization, after a drug efficacy prediction. These Holters were not used to define drug efficacy but were subsequently analyzed to determine the reproducibility of drug efficacy predictions by Holter monitoring. A repeat 24-hour Holter monitor, following the one that predicted drug efficacy, was available in 119 patients. Ninety-nine patients (83%) also had suppression that met efficacy criteria on the second Holter monitor. There were no significant differences in arrhythmia recurrence (p = 0.612) or mortality (p = 0.638) in patients with concordant Holter results (n = 99; 1-year arrhythmia recurrence = 45%; 1-year mortality = 10%) compared with those with discordant Holter results (n = 20; 1-year arrhythmia recurrence = 45%; 1- yeor mortality = 16%). We conclude that (1) there is discordance between the first effective Holter monitor and a repeat Holter monitor in 17% of patients, and (2) suppression of ventricular ectopic activity on 2 separate 24-hour Holter monitors does not identify a group with a baiter outcome, nor does failure of suppression on the second Holter monitor identify a group with a worse prognosis.

AB - Selection of antiarrhythmic therapy may be based on suppression of spontaneous ventricular arrhythmias assessed by Holter monitoring, but the implications of discordant Holter results on repeat 24-hour monitoring has not been defined. This study examines the frequency and significance of reproducible Holter suppression on two 24-hour recordings in the Electrophysiologic Study Versus Electrocardiographic Monitoring (ESVEM) trial. Repeat 24-hour Holter monitoring was obtained in patients randomized to the Holter monitor limb of the ESVEM trial, during the same hospitalization, after a drug efficacy prediction. These Holters were not used to define drug efficacy but were subsequently analyzed to determine the reproducibility of drug efficacy predictions by Holter monitoring. A repeat 24-hour Holter monitor, following the one that predicted drug efficacy, was available in 119 patients. Ninety-nine patients (83%) also had suppression that met efficacy criteria on the second Holter monitor. There were no significant differences in arrhythmia recurrence (p = 0.612) or mortality (p = 0.638) in patients with concordant Holter results (n = 99; 1-year arrhythmia recurrence = 45%; 1-year mortality = 10%) compared with those with discordant Holter results (n = 20; 1-year arrhythmia recurrence = 45%; 1- yeor mortality = 16%). We conclude that (1) there is discordance between the first effective Holter monitor and a repeat Holter monitor in 17% of patients, and (2) suppression of ventricular ectopic activity on 2 separate 24-hour Holter monitors does not identify a group with a baiter outcome, nor does failure of suppression on the second Holter monitor identify a group with a worse prognosis.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0031052363&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0031052363&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S0002-9149(96)00754-0

DO - 10.1016/S0002-9149(96)00754-0

M3 - Article

C2 - 9036751

AN - SCOPUS:0031052363

VL - 79

SP - 315

EP - 322

JO - American Journal of Cardiology

JF - American Journal of Cardiology

SN - 0002-9149

IS - 3

ER -