Can heart rate variability parameters derived by a heart rate monitor differentiate between atrial fibrillation and sinus rhythm?

B Broux,L Vera,G Van Loon,A Decloedt,D De Clercq,S Ven,P Deprez

doi:10.1186/s12917-018-1650-6

Abstract

BackgroundHeart rate variability (HRV) parameters, and especially RMSSD (root mean squared successive differences in RR interval), could distinguish atrial fibrillation (AF) from sinus rhythm(SR) in horses, as was demonstrated in a previous study. If heart rate monitors (HRM) automatically calculating RMSSD could also distinguish AF from SR, they would be useful for the monitoring of AF recurrence. The objective of the study was to assess whether RMSSD values obtained from a HRM can differentiate AF from SR in horses. Furthermore, the impact of artifact correction algorithms, integrated in the analyses software for HRV analyses was evaluated. Fourteen horses presented for AF treatment were simultaneously equipped with a HRM and an electrocardiogram (ECG). A two-minute recording at rest, walk and trot, before and after cardioversion, was obtained. RR intervals used were those determined automatically by the HRM and by the equine ECG analysis software, and those obtained after manual correction of QRS detection within the ECG software. RMSSD was calculated by the HRM software and by dedicated HRV software, using six different artifact filters. Statistical analysis was performed using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and receiver operating curves.ResultsThe HRM, which applies a low level filter, produced high area under the curve (AUC) (> 0.9) and cut off values with high sensitivity and specificity. Similar results were obtained for the ECG, when low level artifact filtering was applied. When no artifact correction was used during trotting, an important decrease in AUC (0.75) occurred.ConclusionIn horses treated for AF, HRMs with automatic RMSSD calculations distinguish between AF and SR. Such devices might be a useful aid to monitor for AF recurrence in horses.

Highlights

With a prevalence of 0.3–2.5% of the population, atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common clinically important arrhythmia in horses
RMSSD values obtained from the ECG were significantly different (P < 0.05) between horses in sinus rhythm (SR) and horses in AF, except when a high level of artifact correction was used and at trot if no artifact correction was applied
RMSSD values obtained with the heart rate monitors (HRM) were significantly different between horses in SR and horses in AF, at all paces

Summary

Introduction

With a prevalence of 0.3–2.5% of the population, atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common clinically important arrhythmia in horses. Especially AF, leads to an increased beat-to-beat interval variation, HRV parameters describing short-term variability are increased compared to sinus rhythm (SR) and algorithms using HRV parameters are implemented in devices detecting AF in humans [15,16,17,18,19]. 6 different HRV variables were calculated from RR intervals after beat-to-beat QRS identification on the ECG trace, both during AF and during SR. Heart rate variability (HRV) parameters, and especially RMSSD (root mean squared successive differences in RR interval), could distinguish atrial fibrillation (AF) from sinus rhythm(SR) in horses, as was demonstrated in a previous study. If heart rate monitors (HRM) automatically calculating RMSSD could distinguish AF from SR, they would be useful for the monitoring of AF recurrence. Statistical analysis was performed using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and receiver operating curves

Objectives

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion