We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparison of the diagnostic value of a small, single channel, electrocardiogram monitoring patch with a standard 3-lead Holter system over 24 h in dogs.
Journal of Veterinary Cardiology : the Official Journal of the European Society of Veterinary Cardiology 2023 April 22
INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare a novel small event recorder device, the Carnation Ambulatory Monitor (CAM), with a standard Holter.
ANIMALS: Nineteen adult dogs.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Comparative and explorative study. The two devices were simultaneously applied for approximately 24 h.
RESULTS: analysis time (p=0.013) and percentage of artefacts (p<0.001) were greater for the CAM (110 min [40-264]; and 9% [0-34], respectively) compared to a standard Holter (30 min [18-270]; and 0.3% [0-9], respectively). The total number of beats (p=0.017) and maximum (p=0.02) and mean (p=0.037) heart rates were lower for the CAM (113,806 ± 23,619 beats; 227 ± 35 bpm; and 88 ± 22 bpm, respectively) compared to the standard Holter (131,640 ± 40,037 beats; 260 ± 64 bpm; and 92 ± 26 bpm, respectively). The minimal heart rate (p=0.725), number of pauses (p=0.078), duration of the longest pause (p=0.087), number of ventricular ectopic beats (p=0.55), ventricular couplets (p=0.186), ventricular triplets (p=0.203), ventricular tachycardia (p=0.05), Lown grade (p=0.233), presence or absence of ventricular bigeminy, trigeminy, supraventricular tachycardia, and atrial fibrillation (p=0.98) did not differ. The CAM missed some relevant events, like complex ventricular arrhythmias, and the Lown grade did not match in 5/19 dogs when comparing the devices.
CONCLUSIONS: CAM can be used to record ECG traces in dogs over a prolonged period, allowing to detect arrhythmias. Due to some clinically relevant limitations, including a higher percentage of artefacts, a longer reading time (which precludes quantitative counts of >300VPCs), and underestimation of complex ventricular arrhythmias, the CAM appears not suitable for quantitative arrhythmia analysis in dogs.
ANIMALS: Nineteen adult dogs.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Comparative and explorative study. The two devices were simultaneously applied for approximately 24 h.
RESULTS: analysis time (p=0.013) and percentage of artefacts (p<0.001) were greater for the CAM (110 min [40-264]; and 9% [0-34], respectively) compared to a standard Holter (30 min [18-270]; and 0.3% [0-9], respectively). The total number of beats (p=0.017) and maximum (p=0.02) and mean (p=0.037) heart rates were lower for the CAM (113,806 ± 23,619 beats; 227 ± 35 bpm; and 88 ± 22 bpm, respectively) compared to the standard Holter (131,640 ± 40,037 beats; 260 ± 64 bpm; and 92 ± 26 bpm, respectively). The minimal heart rate (p=0.725), number of pauses (p=0.078), duration of the longest pause (p=0.087), number of ventricular ectopic beats (p=0.55), ventricular couplets (p=0.186), ventricular triplets (p=0.203), ventricular tachycardia (p=0.05), Lown grade (p=0.233), presence or absence of ventricular bigeminy, trigeminy, supraventricular tachycardia, and atrial fibrillation (p=0.98) did not differ. The CAM missed some relevant events, like complex ventricular arrhythmias, and the Lown grade did not match in 5/19 dogs when comparing the devices.
CONCLUSIONS: CAM can be used to record ECG traces in dogs over a prolonged period, allowing to detect arrhythmias. Due to some clinically relevant limitations, including a higher percentage of artefacts, a longer reading time (which precludes quantitative counts of >300VPCs), and underestimation of complex ventricular arrhythmias, the CAM appears not suitable for quantitative arrhythmia analysis in dogs.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app