ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare costs and outcomes of mobile cardiac outpatient telemetry (MCOT) patch followed by implantable loop recorder (ILR) compared to ILR alone in cryptogenic stroke patients from the US health-care payors' perspective. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A quantitative decision tree cost-minimization simulation model was developed. Eligible patients were 18 years of age or older and were diagnosed with having a cryptogenic stroke, without previously documented atrial fibrillation (AF). All patients were assigned first to one then to the alternative monitoring strategies. Following AF detection, patients were initiated on oral anticoagulants (OAC). The model assessed direct costs for one year attributed to MCOT patch followed by ILR or ILR alone using a monitoring duration of 30 days post-cryptogenic stroke. RESULTS: In the base case modeling, the MCOT patch arm detected 4.6 more patients with AFs compared to the ILR alone arm in a cohort of 1000 patients (209 vs 45 patients with detected AFs, respectively). Using MCOT patch followed by ILR in half of the patients initially undiagnosed with AF leads to significant cost savings of US$4,083,214 compared to ILR alone in a cohort of 1000 patients. Cost per patient with detected AF was significantly lower in the MCOT patch arm $29,598 vs $228,507 in the ILR only arm. CONCLUSION: An initial strategy of 30-day electrocardiogram (ECG) monitoring with MCOT patch in diagnosis of AF in cryptogenic stroke patients realizes significant cost-savings compared to proceeding directly to ILR only. Almost 8 times lower costs were achieved with improved detection rates and reduction of secondary stroke risk due to new anticoagulant use in subjects with MCOT patch detected AF. These results strengthen emerging recommendations for prolonged ECG monitoring in secondary stroke prevention.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Asymptomatic arrhythmias can have important therapeutic implications in certain patient populations, for example, atrial fibrillation in patients with prior ischemic stroke. We sought to compare the diagnostic yield of two commercially available monitoring systems with automated arrhythmia detection algorithms. METHODS: We queried a large, proprietary database containing rhythm data for patients receiving ambulatory EKG monitoring (BioTelemetry, Malvern, PA, USA). We compared all patients prescribed mobile cardiac outpatient telemetry (MCOT™, Braemar Manufacturing, LLC, Eagan, MN, USA) versus autotrigger looping event recorder (AT-LER) devices over a consecutive 8-month period. Data from both device types were analyzed for diagnostic yields in detecting asymptomatic (device-triggered) arrhythmias consisting of atrial fibrillation (of any detected duration), bradycardia (ventricular rate ≤ 40 bpm), ventricular pause (≥ 3 seconds), supraventricular tachycardia (≥ 6 consecutive supraventricular beats), and ventricular tachycardia (≥ 4 consecutive premature ventricular contractions). The mean time to first diagnosis of each arrhythmia for each device was determined. Physician-designated diagnostic codes for patients prescribed each device were also determined from the database. RESULTS: The MCOT™ device had significantly higher diagnostic yields of all evaluated asymptomatic arrhythmias than the AT-LER. The MCOT™ device also produced an earlier mean time to diagnosis for all evaluated asymptomatic arrhythmias. These findings were noted despite a shorter average prescription length for MCOT™ monitored patients. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with conventional diagnostic monitoring indications, MCOT™ had significantly higher diagnostic yields for five asymptomatic arrhythmias compared to the AT-LER.
