Analyze Diet
Journal of equine veterinary science2019; 79; 127-130; doi: 10.1016/j.jevs.2019.06.001

Two Methods for 24-hour Holter Monitoring in Horses: Evaluation of Recording Performance at Rest and During Exercise.

Abstract: Continuous electrocardiography (ECG) monitoring is the gold standard for diagnosing arrhythmias that occur intermittently or under exercise. The aim of this study was to compare two different methods for 24-hour Holter monitoring in horses, a 7-electrode system (7-ES) versus a 4-electrode system (4-ES), assessing the recording performance at rest and during exercise. Six standardbred horses were included in the present prospective study. Two different methods for 24-hour Holter monitoring were used in each horse with a washout period of one week between each recording method. In the first 15 minutes of the 24-hour Holter monitoring, a standard exercise test was performed. Holter recordings were analyzed in terms of the number of recorded hours; the number of detached electrodes (DEs); and total duration of artifacts over the 15-minute exercise. The number of recorded hours was significantly higher in the 7-ES (24 hours, range: 23-24 hours) than the 4-ES (6.5 hours, range: 1.2-20 hours; P < .05). The number of DEs was not significantly different between the two systems. The total duration of artifacts over the 15-minute exercise was significantly higher in the 7-ES (155 seconds, range: 35-378 seconds) than in the 4-ES (25 seconds, range: 10-32 seconds; P < .05). Our results showed a better recording performance during exercise using the 4-ES because of the lower number of artifacts. The 7-ES showed a better performance in terms of recording duration. In conclusion, we suggest using the 4-ES for exercise tests and the 7-ES when a longer ECG recording at rest is required.
Publication Date: 2019-06-19 PubMed ID: 31405491DOI: 10.1016/j.jevs.2019.06.001Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
  • Journal Article
  • Research Support
  • Non-U.S. Gov't

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

The research article discusses a study comparing two methods (7-electrode system and 4-electrode system) of 24-hour Holter monitoring in horses. The study aims to evaluate which method performs better during resting state and exercise. The data concludes that the 4-electrode system is more effective during exercise due to lower artifacts, whereas the 7-electrode system is recommended for longer rest periods due to its extended recording duration.

Methods

  • The study included six standardbred horses and implemented two different methods for 24-hour Holter monitoring with a washout period of one week between each recording method.
  • During the initial 15 minutes of the 24-hour Holter monitoring, a standard exercise test was performed to evaluate the systems’ performance under physical stress.

Measurements

  • The comparative evaluation of the two approaches focused on three metrics: the number of recorded hours, the number of detached electrodes (DEs) and the total duration of artifacts (irregularities) over the 15-minute exercise.

Results

  • The 7-electrode system was able to record for significantly longer durations (24 hours, with a range of 23-24 hours) than the 4-electrode system (6.5 hours, with a range of 1.2-20 hours).
  • However, there was no significant difference between the number of detached electrodes in the two systems.
  • The duration of artifacts during the 15-minute exercise was significantly higher in the 7-electrode system (155 seconds, with a range of 35-378 seconds) than the 4-electrode system (25 seconds, with a range of 10-32 seconds).

Conclusion

  • Based on the obtained data, the researchers concluded that the 4-electrode system showcases enhanced performance during exercise due to its lower count of artifacts.
  • On the other hand, the 7-electrode system demonstrated superior performance for extended recording periods at rest.
  • The study suggests using the 4-electrode system for exercise tests and the 7-electrode system when longer electrocardiography recordings at rest are needed.

Cite This Article

APA
Vezzosi T, Vitale V, Sgorbini M, Tognetti R, Bonelli F. (2019). Two Methods for 24-hour Holter Monitoring in Horses: Evaluation of Recording Performance at Rest and During Exercise. J Equine Vet Sci, 79, 127-130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jevs.2019.06.001

Publication

ISSN: 0737-0806
NlmUniqueID: 8216840
Country: United States
Language: English
Volume: 79
Pages: 127-130
PII: S0737-0806(19)30431-9

Researcher Affiliations

Vezzosi, Tommaso
  • Department of Veterinary Sciences, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
Vitale, Valentina
  • Sydney School of Veterinary Science, The University of Sydney, Camden, NSW, Australia.
Sgorbini, Micaela
  • Department of Veterinary Sciences, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
Tognetti, Rosalba
  • Department of Veterinary Sciences, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy. Electronic address: rosalba.tognetti@unipi.it.
Bonelli, Francesca
  • Department of Veterinary Sciences, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.

MeSH Terms

  • Animals
  • Arrhythmias, Cardiac / veterinary
  • Electrocardiography
  • Electrocardiography, Ambulatory
  • Exercise Test / veterinary
  • Horses
  • Prospective Studies

Citations

This article has been cited 2 times.
  1. Turini L, Bonelli F, Lanatà A, Vitale V, Nocera I, Sgorbini M, Mele M. Validation of a new smart textiles biotechnology for heart rate variability monitoring in sheep.. Front Vet Sci 2022;9:1018213.
    doi: 10.3389/fvets.2022.1018213pubmed: 36483489google scholar: lookup
  2. Vitale V, Vezzosi T, Tognetti R, Fraschetti C, Sgorbini M. Evaluation of a new portable 1-lead digital cardiac monitor (eKuore) compared with standard base-apex electrocardiography in healthy horses.. PLoS One 2021;16(8):e0255247.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0255247pubmed: 34343184google scholar: lookup