LAUSR

Background and Purpose: Prolonged cardiac rhythm monitoring can reveal a substantial proportion of ischemic stroke (IS) patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). We sought to evaluate the potential utility of available prolonged cardiac rhythm monitoring strategies with respect to secondary stroke prevention. Methods: We searched Medline and Scopus databases to identify randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) comparing AF detection, anticoagulation initiation and stroke recurrence rates in patients with history of recent IS or transient ischemic attack (TIA) receiving cardiac rhythm monitoring with implantable loop recorders (ILRs), 30-days external loop recorders or Holter monitors. We performed a network meta-analysis to combine direct and indirect evidence for any given pair of monitoring devices that were evaluated within a trial and reported effect estimates with risk ratios (RRs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95%CIs). Results: We identified 5 RCTs including a total of 2202 patients (mean age 68 years, 40% women). In indirect analyses the likelihood of AF detection and anticoagulation initiation was higher for both ILR (RR=8.48, 95%CI: 3.41, 21.06; RR=3.29, 95%CI: 1.70-6.39) and external loop recorders (RR=3.06, 95%CI: 1.66, 5.61; RR=1.63, 95%CI: 1.03-2.58) compared to Holter devices. The probability of AF detection and anticoagulation initiation was lower for Holter and external loop recorders compared to ILR devices (RR=0.36, 95%CI: 0.15, 0.85 and RR=0.50, 95%CI: 0.25-0.98, respectively). No difference in the risk of stroke recurrence was found in the indirect comparisons of different cardiac rhythm monitoring strategies. Conclusion: The likelihood of AF detection and anticoagulation initiation after an ischemic stroke or TIA is higher with ILRs compared to both external loop recorders and Holter devices.