Comparison and Combination of Single-Lead ECG and Photoplethysmography Algorithms for Wearable-Based Atrial Fibrillation Screening.

Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF), the most common cardiac arrhythmia, can be detected by smartphones and smartwatches. Introduction: Single-lead ECGs (iECGs) and photoplethysmography (PPG) sensors provide the opportunity for a broad, simple, and easily repeatable cardiac rhythm analysis. To reduce unnecessary medical follow-up testing due to false positive results, our aim was to find a screening approach applicable on smart devices with a focus on high specificity. Methods: We used PPG measurements from smartphones and smartwatches and iECG data from two previous validation trials. Two AF detection algorithms (A and B) were applied on the iECG dataset and compared directly. Further, we used 1-min PPG measurements as a first-pass filter for arrhythmia detection and simulated a sequential testing: Once an arrhythmia was detected in the PPG, the iECG counterpart of the patient was analyzed by algorithm A, B, or A + B combined although algorithm B was primarily designed for PPG analysis. Results: The iECGs from 1,288 participants were analyzed. Algorithm A did not show a diagnosis in 16.1%. In the remaining, sensitivity and specificity were 99.6%, and 97.4% respectively. Accuracy was 98.5%, and correct classification rate (CCR) was 82.7%. Algorithm B always differentiated between normal and arrhythmic and reached an overall sensitivity of 95.4%, a specificity of 91.6%, and an accuracy and CCR of 93.3%. Sequential testing by combining both algorithms into a three-phase test (Test positive PPG, then iECG analysis by A and B combined) resulted in a 100% specificity. Conclusion: Algorithm B performed strongly in PPG analysis as well as iECG analysis. PPG signals and consecutive iECG combined when an arrhythmia was detected by PPG resulted in a specificity that was higher than 99%. Discussion: The analysis allows a direct comparison of iECG algorithms without possible dilution by different measurement procedures or recording-devices. We improved specificity in AF-screening approaches with wearables by simulating a novel approach. Results rely on signal quality.

The impact of competing stroke etiologies in patients with atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Data on the impact of competing stroke etiologies in stroke patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) are scarce. METHODS: We used prospectively obtained data from an observational registry (Novel-Oral-Anticoagulants-in-Ischemic-Stroke-Patients-(NOACISP)-LONGTERM) of consecutive AF-stroke patients treated with oral anticoagulants. We compared the frequency of (i) the composite outcome of recurrent ischemic stroke (IS), intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) or all-cause death as well as (ii) recurrent IS alone among AF-stroke patients with versus without competing stroke etiologies according to the TOAST classification. We performed cox proportional hazards regression modeling adjusted for potential confounders. Furthermore, the etiology of recurrent IS was assessed. RESULTS: Among 907 patients (median age 81, 45.6% female), 184 patients (20.3%) had competing etiologies, while 723 (79.7%) had cardioembolism as the only plausible etiology. During 1587 patient-years of follow-up, patients with additional large-artery atherosclerosis had higher rates of the composite outcome (adjusted HR [95% CI] 1.64 [1.11, 2.40], p = 0.017) and recurrent IS (aHR 2.96 [1.65, 5.35 ], p < 0.001), compared to patients with cardioembolism as the only plausible etiology. Overall 71 patients had recurrent IS (7.8%) of whom 26.7% had a different etiology than the index IS with large-artery-atherosclerosis (19.7%) being the most common non-cardioembolic cause. CONCLUSION: In stroke patients with AF, causes other than cardioembolism as competing etiologies were common in index or recurrent IS. Concomitant presence of large-artery-atherosclerosis seems to indicate an increased risk for recurrences suggesting that stroke preventive means might be more effective if they also address competing stroke etiologies in AF-stroke patients. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03826927.