Background: Detection of arrhythmias is crucial for the treatment of cardiovascular diseases. However, conventional devices do not provide sufficient diagnostic accuracy while patients should suffer from bothersome diagnostic process. We sought to evaluate diagnostic capability and safety of the new adhesive electrocardiogram (ECG) monitoring device in patients who need ECG monitoring during admission. Methods: We enrolled 10 patients who admitted to Seoul National University Bundang Hospital and required continuous ECG monitoring between October 31, 2019 and December 18, 2019. New adhesive ECG monitoring device and conventional ECG monitoring device were simultaneously applied to the patients and maintained for 48 hours. From each patient, 48 pairs of ECG signal were collected and analyzed by two cardiologists independently. Discrepancy of diagnosis and frequency of noise or signal loss were compared between the two devices. Results: From analyzable ECG data, discrepancy of arrhythmia diagnosis was not observed between the two devices. Noise rate was higher in conventional ECG monitoring device (2.5% vs. 17.3%, P < 0.001) and signal loss was not observed in new adhesive device while there was 9.4% of signal losses in conventional Holter recorder group. The new device was well-tolerated among 48 hours of monitoring period and no adverse event was observed. Conclusion: A newer adhesive ECG monitoring device demonstrated similar diagnostic accuracy compared to conventional ECG monitoring device.

Background Rapid revascularization is the key to better patient outcomes in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Direct activation of cardiac catheterization laboratory (CCL) using artificial intelligence (AI) interpretation of initial electrocardiography (ECG) might help reduce door-to-balloon (D2B) time. To prove that this approach is feasible and beneficial, we assessed the non-inferiority of such a process over conventional evaluation and estimated its clinical benefits, including a reduction in D2B time, medical cost, and 1-year mortality. Methods This is a single-center retrospective study of emergency department (ED) patients suspected of having STEMI from January 2021 to June 2021. Quantitative ECG (QCG™), a comprehensive cardiovascular evaluation system, was used for screening. The non-inferiority of the AI-driven CCL activation over joint clinical evaluation by emergency physicians and cardiologists was tested using a 5% non-inferiority margin. Results Eighty patients (STEMI, 54 patients [67.5%]) were analyzed. The area under the curve of QCG score was 0.947. Binned at 50 (binary QCG), the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) were 98.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 94.6%, 100.0%), 76.9% (95% CI, 60.7%, 93.1%), 89.8% (95% CI, 82.1%, 97.5%) and 95.2% (95% CI, 86.1%, 100.0%), respectively. The difference in sensitivity and specificity between binary QCG and the joint clinical decision was 3.7% (95% CI, −3.5%, 10.9%) and 19.2% (95% CI, −4.7%, 43.1%), respectively, confirming the non-inferiority. The estimated median reduction in D2B time, evaluation cost, and the relative risk of 1-year mortality were 11.0 minutes (interquartile range [IQR], 7.3–20.0 minutes), 26,902.2 KRW (22.78 USD) per STEMI patient, and 12.39% (IQR, 7.51–22.54%), respectively. Conclusion AI-assisted CCL activation using initial ECG is feasible. If such a policy is implemented, it would be reasonable to expect some reduction in D2B time, medical cost, and 1-year mortality.

Background and Aims Although many angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are widely used, comparative data regarding their impact on clinical outcomes are limited. We aimed to compare the clinical effectiveness of seven ARBs on long‐term cardiovascular outcomes in Korean patients with hypertension. Methods Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, the data of 780,785 patients with hypertension without cardiovascular disease (CVD) who initiated ARB treatment (candesartan, fimasartan, irbesartan, losartan, olmesartan, telmisartan, or valsartan) in 2014 and underwent this treatment for more than 6 months, were analyzed. Cox‐regression analysis was performed using Losartan as a comparator, as it was the most widely used drug, by adjusting age, sex, diabetes, dyslipidemia, smoking, alcohol drinking, exercise, body mass index, systolic blood pressure, albuminuria, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and concomitant medications. The occurrence of mortality and the rate of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) of the six ARBs was compared with that of losartan. Results The median follow‐up duration was 5.94 (interquartile range, 5.87–5.97) years. In the crude analysis of all‐cause mortality and MACEs, fimasartan exhibited the lowest event rates. In the Cox‐regression analysis with adjustment, there was no significant difference in all‐cause mortality among ARBs. The risk of MACEs with ARBs was similar to that with losartan, although the risks with irbesartan (hazard ratio [HR], 1.079; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.033–1.127; p = 0.007) and candesartan (HR: 1.066; 95% CI, 1.028–1.106; p = 0.015) were slightly higher. Conclusion In a Korean population of patients with hypertension without CVD, six different ARBs showed similar efficacy to losartan in terms of long‐term mortality and MACEs. Further well‐designed prospective studies are required to confirm our findings.

Background Acute myocardial infarction may be associated with new-onset arrhythmias. Patients with myocardial infarction may manifest serious arrhythmias such as ventricular tachyarrhythmias or atrial fibrillation. Frequent, prolonged electrocardiogram (ECG) monitoring can prevent devastating outcomes caused by these arrhythmias. Objective We aimed to investigate the incidence of arrhythmias in patients following myocardial infarction using a patch-type device—AT-Patch (ATP-C120; ATsens). Methods This study is a nonrandomized, single-center, prospective cohort study. We evaluated 71 patients who had had a myocardial infarction and had been admitted to our hospital. The ATP-C120 device was attached to the patient for 11 days and analyzed by 2 cardiologists for new-onset arrhythmic events. Results One participant was concordantly diagnosed with atrial fibrillation. The cardiologists diagnosed atrial premature beats in 65 (92%) and 60 (85%) of 71 participants, and ventricular premature beats in 38 (54%) and 44 (62%) participants, respectively. Interestingly, 40 (56%) patients showed less than 2 minutes of sustained paroxysmal atrial tachycardia confirmed by both cardiologists. Among participants with atrial tachycardia, the use of β-blockers was significantly lower compared with patients without tachycardia (70% vs 90%, P=.04). However, different dosages of β-blockers did not make a significant difference. Conclusions Wearable ECG monitoring patch devices are easy to apply and can correlate symptoms and ECG rhythm disturbances in patients following myocardial infarction. Further study is necessary regarding clinical implications and appropriate therapies for arrhythmias detected early after myocardial infarction to prevent adverse outcomes.