E-Mail Us Close
Please note that this email should only be used for feedback and comments specifically related to this particular medical policy.
  
Horizon BCBSNJ
Uniform Medical Policy ManualSection:Medicine
Policy Number:009
Effective Date: 08/08/2019
Original Policy Date:01/01/1992
Last Review Date:06/09/2020
Date Published to Web: 08/08/2019
Subject:
Ambulatory Event Monitors and Mobile Cardiac Outpatient Telemetry

Description:
_______________________________________________________________________________________

IMPORTANT NOTE:

The purpose of this policy is to provide general information applicable to the administration of health benefits that Horizon Blue Cross Blue Shield of New Jersey and Horizon Healthcare of New Jersey, Inc. (collectively “Horizon BCBSNJ”) insures or administers. If the member’s contract benefits differ from the medical policy, the contract prevails. Although a service, supply or procedure may be medically necessary, it may be subject to limitations and/or exclusions under a member’s benefit plan. If a service, supply or procedure is not covered and the member proceeds to obtain the service, supply or procedure, the member may be responsible for the cost. Decisions regarding treatment and treatment plans are the responsibility of the physician. This policy is not intended to direct the course of clinical care a physician provides to a member, and it does not replace a physician’s independent professional clinical judgment or duty to exercise special knowledge and skill in the treatment of Horizon BCBSNJ members. Horizon BCBSNJ is not responsible for, does not provide, and does not hold itself out as a provider of medical care. The physician remains responsible for the quality and type of health care services provided to a Horizon BCBSNJ member.

Horizon BCBSNJ medical policies do not constitute medical advice, authorization, certification, approval, explanation of benefits, offer of coverage, contract or guarantee of payment.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Various devices are available for outpatient cardiac rhythm monitoring. These devices differ in the types of monitoring leads used, the duration and continuity of monitoring, the ability to detect arrhythmias without patient intervention, and the mechanism of delivering the information from patient to clinician. These devices may be used to evaluate symptoms suggestive of arrhythmias (eg, syncope, palpitations), and may be used to detect atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients who have undergone cardiac ablation of AF or who have a history of cryptogenic stroke.

PopulationsInterventionsComparatorsOutcomes
Individuals:
  • With signs and/or symptoms suggestive of arrhythmia
Interventions of interest are:
  • Patient- or autoactivated external ambulatory event monitoring
  • Continuous ambulatory monitoring storing information >48 hours
Comparators of interest are:
  • Electrocardiogram only or 24- to 48-hour Holter monitoring
Relevant outcomes include:
  • Overall survival
  • Morbid events
Individuals:
  • With atrial fibrillation following ablation
Interventions of interest are:
  • Long-term ambulatory cardiac monitoring
Comparators of interest are:
  • Electrocardiogram only or 24- to 48-hour Holter monitoring
Relevant outcomes include:
  • Overall survival
  • Morbid events
  • Medication use
  • Treatment-related morbidity
Individuals:
  • With cryptogenic stroke with negative standard workup for atrial fibrillation
Interventions of interest are:
  • Long-term ambulatory cardiac monitoring
Comparators of interest are:
  • Standard evaluation for stroke, including electrocardiogram and 24-hour Holter monitoring
Relevant outcomes include:
  • Overall survival
  • Morbid events
  • Medication use
  • Treatment-related morbidity
Individuals:
  • Who are asymptomatic with risk factors for atrial fibrillation
Interventions of interest are:
  • Long-term ambulatory cardiac monitoring
Comparators of interest are:
  • No additional evaluation or standard care
Relevant outcomes include:
  • Overall survival
  • Morbid events
  • Medication use
  • Treatment-related morbidity
Individuals:
  • With signs and/or symptoms suggestive of arrhythmia with infrequent symptoms
Interventions of interest are:
  • Patient- or autoactivated implantable ambulatory event monitoring
Comparators of interest are:
  • No additional evaluation or standard care
  • Patient- or autoactivated external ambulatory event monitoring
Relevant outcomes include:
  • Overall survival
  • Morbid events
  • Medication use
  • Treatment-related morbidity
Individuals:
  • With signs and/or symptoms suggestive of arrhythmia
Interventions of interest are:
  • Outpatient cardiac telemetry
Comparators of interest are:
  • Patient- or autoactivated external ambulatory event monitoring
Relevant outcomes include:
  • Overall survival
  • Morbid events

BACKGROUND

Cardiac Arrhythmias
Cardiac monitoring is routinely used in the inpatient setting to detect acute changes in heart rate or rhythm that may need urgent response. For some conditions, a more prolonged period of monitoring in the ambulatory setting is needed to detect heart rate or rhythm abnormalities that may occur infrequently. These cases may include the diagnosis of arrhythmias in patients with signs and symptoms suggestive of arrhythmias as well as the evaluation of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF).

Cardiac arrhythmias may be suspected because of symptoms suggestive of arrhythmias, including palpitations, dizziness, or syncope or presyncope, or because of abnormal heart rate or rhythm noted on exam. A full discussion of the differential diagnosis and evaluation of each of these symptoms is beyond the scope of this review, but some general principles on the use of ambulatory monitoring are discussed.

Arrhythmias are an important potential cause of syncope or near syncope, which in some cases may be described as dizziness. An electrocardiogram (ECG) is generally indicated whenever there is suspicion of a cardiac cause of syncope. Some arrhythmic causes will be apparent on ECG. However, for patients in whom an ECG is not diagnostic, longer monitoring may be indicated. The 2009 joint guidelines from the European Society of Cardiology and 3 other medical specialty societies suggested that, in individuals with clinical or ECG features suggesting an arrhythmic syncope, ECG monitoring is indicated; the guidelines also stated that the "duration (and technology) of monitoring should be selected according to the risk and the predicted recurrence rate of syncope."1, Similarly, guidelines from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (2014) on the evaluation of transient loss of consciousness, have recommended the use of an ambulatory ECG in individuals with a suspected arrhythmic cause of syncope. The type and duration of monitoring recommended is based on the individual's history, particularly the frequency of transient loss of consciousness.2, The Holter monitor is recommended if transient loss of consciousness occurs several times a week. If the frequency of transient loss of consciousness is every one to two weeks, an external event recorder is recommended; and if the frequency is less than once every two weeks, an implantable event recorder is recommended.

Similar to syncope, the evaluation and management of palpitations is patient-specific. In cases where the initial history, examination, and ECG findings are suggestive of an arrhythmia, some form of ambulatory ECG monitoring is indicated. A position paper from the European Heart Rhythm Association (2011) indicated that, for individuals with palpitations of unknown origin who have clinical features suggestive of arrhythmia, referral for specialized evaluation with consideration for ambulatory ECG monitoring is indicated.3,

Atrial Fibrillation Detection

AF is the most common arrhythmia in adults. It may be asymptomatic or be associated with a broad range of symptoms, including lightheadedness, palpitations, dyspnea, and a variety of more nonspecific symptoms (eg, fatigue, malaise). It is classified as paroxysmal, persistent, or permanent based on symptom duration. Diagnosed AF may be treated with antiarrhythmic medications with the goal of rate or rhythm control. Other treatments include direct cardioversion, catheter-based radiofrequency- or cryo-energy-based ablation, or one of several surgical techniques, depending on the patient's comorbidities and associated symptoms.

Stroke in AF occurs primarily as a result of thromboembolism from the left atrium. The lack of atrial contractions in AF leads to blood stasis in the left atrium, and this low flow state increases the risk of thrombosis. The area of the left atrium with the lowest blood flow in AF, and therefore the highest risk of thrombosis, is the left atrial appendage. Multiple clinical trials have demonstrated that anticoagulation reduces the ischemic stroke risk in patients at moderate- or high-risk of thromboembolic events. Oral anticoagulation in patients with AF reduces the risk of subsequent stroke and was recommended by American Heart Association, American College of Cardiology, and Heart Rhythm Society(2014) joint guidelines on patients with a history of stroke or transient ischemic attack.4,

Ambulatory ECG monitoring may play a role in several situations in the detection of AF. In patients who have undergone ablative treatment for AF, if ongoing AF can be excluded with reasonable certainty, including paroxysmal AF which may not be apparent on ECG during an office visit, anticoagulation therapy could potentially be stopped. In some cases where identifying paroxysmal AF is associated with potential changes in management, longer term monitoring may be considered. There are well-defined management changes that occur in patients with AF. However, until relatively recent the specific role of long-term (ie, >48 hours) monitoring in AF was not well-described.

Patients with cryptogenic stroke are often monitored for the presence of AF because AF is estimated to be the cause of cryptogenic stroke in more than 10% of patients, and AF increases the risk of stroke.5,6, Paroxysmal AF confers an elevated risk of stroke, just as persistent and permanent AF do. In individuals with a high-risk of stroke, particularly those with a history of ischemic stroke that is unexplained by other causes, prolonged monitoring to identify paroxysmal AF has been investigated.

Cardiac Rhythm Ambulatory Monitoring Devices

Ambulatory cardiac monitoring with a variety of devices permits the evaluation of cardiac electrical activity over time, in contrast to a static ECG, which only permits the detection of abnormalities in cardiac electrical activity at a single point in time.

A Holter monitor is worn continuously and records cardiac electrical output continuously throughout the recording period. Holter monitors are capable of recording activity for 24 to 72 hours. Traditionally, most Holter monitors have three channels based on three ECG leads. However, some currently available Holter monitors have up to 12 channels. Holter monitors are an accepted intervention in a variety of settings where a short period (24-48 hours) of comprehensive cardiac rhythm assessment is needed (eg, suspected arrhythmias when symptoms [syncope, palpitations] are occurring daily). These devices are not the focus of this review.

Various classes of devices are available for situations where longer monitoring than can be obtained with a traditional Holter monitor is needed. Because there may be many devices within each category, a comprehensive description of each is beyond our scope. Devices vary in how data are transmitted to the location where the ECG output is interpreted. Data may be transmitted via cellular phone or landline, or by direct download from the device after its return to the monitoring center. The device classes are described in Table 1.

Table 1. Ambulatory Cardiac Rhythm Monitoring Devices

Device ClassDescriptionDevice Examples
Noncontinuous devices with memory (event recorder)Devices not worn continuously but rather activated by patient and applied to skin in the precordial area when symptoms develop
  • Zio® Event Card (iRhythm Technologies)
  • REKA E100™ (REKA Health)
Continuous recording devices with longer recording periodsDevices continuously worn and continuously record via ≥1 cardiac leads and store data longer than traditional Holter (14 d)
  • Zio® Patch system (iRhythm Technologies)
External memory loop devices (patient- or autotriggered)Devices continuously worn and store a single channel of ECG data in a refreshed memory. When the device is activated, the ECG is then recorded from the memory loop for the preceding 30-90 s and for next 60 s or so. Devices may be activated by a patient when symptoms occur (patient-triggered) or by an automated algorithm when changes suggestive of an arrhythmia are detected (autotriggered).
  • Patient-triggered: Explorer™ Looping Monitor (LifeWatch Services)
  • Autotriggered: LifeStar AF Express™ Auto-Detect Looping Monitor (LifeWatch Services)
  • Autotriggered or patient-triggered: King of Hearts Express® AF (Card Guard Scientific Survival)
Implantable memory loop devices (patient- or autotriggered)Devices similar in design to external memory loop devices but implanted under the skin in the precordial region
  • Autotriggered or patient-triggered: Reveal® XT ICM (Medtronic) and Confirm Rx Insertable™ Cardiac Monitor (Abbott)
  • Autotriggered: BioMonitor, Biotronik)
Mobile cardiac outpatient telemetryContinuously recording or autotriggered memory loop devices that transmit data to a central recording station with real-time monitoring and analysis
  • CardioNet MCOT (BioTelemetry)
  • LifeStar Mobile Cardiac Telemetry (LifeWatch Services)
  • SEEQ Mobile Cardiac Telemetry (Medtronic)

ECG: electrocardiogram.

There are also devices that combine features of multiple classes. For example, the LifeStar ACT Ex Holter (LifeWatch Services) is a 3-channel Holter monitor, but is converted to a mobile cardiac telemetry system if a diagnosis is inconclusive after 24 to 48 hours of monitoring. The BodyGuardian® Heart Remote Monitoring System (Preventice Services) is an external autotriggered memory loop device that can be converted to a real-time monitoring system. The eCardio Verité™ system (eCardio) can switch between a patient-activated event monitor and a continuous telemetry monitor. The Spiderflash-T (LivaNova) is an example of an external autotriggered or patient-triggered loop recorder, but like the ZioÒ Patch, can record 2 channels for 14 to 40 days.

Regulatory Status

Some of the newer devices are described in the Background section for informational purposes. Because there may be many devices within each category, a comprehensive description of individual devices is beyond the scope of this review. U.S. Food and Drug Administration product codes include: DSH, DXH, DQK, DSI, MXD, MHX.

Related Policies

  • None

Policy:
(NOTE: For Medicare Advantage, Medicaid and FIDE-SNP, please refer to the Coverage Sections below for coverage guidance.)

1. The use of patient-activated or auto-activated external ambulatory event monitors (AEMs) OR continuous ambulatory monitors that record and store information for periods longer than 48 hours (please refer to policy statement #2 below for outpatient cardiac telemetry or MCOT) are considered medically necessary as a diagnostic alternative to Holter monitoring in the following situations:
    • Members who experience infrequent symptoms (less frequently than every 48 hours) suggestive of cardiac arrhythmias (i.e., palpitations, dizziness, presyncope, or syncope).
    • Members with atrial fibrillation (AF) who have been treated with catheter ablation, and in whom discontinuation of systemic anticoagulation is being considered.
    • Members with cryptogenic stroke who have a negative standard work-up for AF including a 24-hour Holter monitor (see Policy Guidelines section).

2. The use of outpatient cardiac telemetry (also known as mobile cardiac outpatient telemetry) is considered medically necessary in the following situations:
    • In the subset of members with recurrent, unexplained symptoms suggestive of cardiac arrhythmias (i.e., palpitations, dizziness, presyncope or syncope) occurring less frequently than once every 30 days who have had a non-diagnostic trial of other external ambulatory event monitors.
    • In members with cryptogenic stroke with suspected occult nonvalvular atrial fibrillation as the cause of the stroke who have had a previous non-diagnostic trial of other external ambulatory event monitors.

3. The use of implantable AEMs, either patient-activated or auto-activated, is considered medically necessary in the following situations:
    • In the small subset of members who experience recurrent symptoms so infrequently that a prior trial of external ambulatory event monitors has been unsuccessful.
    • In members who require long-term monitoring for AF or possible AF (see Policy Guidelines section).

4. Other uses of AEMs are considered investigational, including but not limited to monitoring asymptomatic members with risk factors for arrhythmia, monitoring the effectiveness of antiarrhythmic medications, and detection of myocardial ischemia by detecting ST-segment changes.


Medicare Coverage:
There are several applicable CMS determinations for these services. For eligibility and coverage, refer to the following:

National Coverage Determination (NCD) for Electrocardiographic Services (20.15). Available at: https://www.cms.gov/medicare-coverage-database/details/ncd-details.aspx?NCDId=179&ncdver=2&bc=AAAAgAAAAAAAAA%3d%3d&.

Local Coverage Determination (LCD):Cardiac Event Detection Monitoring (L34953). Available at: https://www.cms.gov/medicare-coverage-database/details/lcd-details.aspx?LCDId=34953&ContrId=323&ver=8&ContrVer=1&Date=10%2f05%2f2015&DocID=L34953&bc=iAAAAAgAAAAAAA%3d%3d&.

Local Coverage Determination (LCD): Real-Time, Outpatient Cardiac Telemetry (L34997). Available at: https://www.cms.gov/medicare-coverage-database/details/lcd-details.aspx?LCDId=34997&ContrId=323&ver=10&ContrVer=1&Date=10%2f06%2f2015&DocID=L34997&bc=iAAAAAgAAAAAAA%3d%3d&.

Local Coverage Article: Billing and Coding: Cardiac Event Detection Monitoring (A56600). Available to be accessed at Novitas Solutions, Inc., Medical Policy Search page: https://www.novitas-solutions.com/webcenter/portal/MedicareJL/pagebyid?contentId=00024370

Local Coverage Article: Billing and Coding: Real-Time, Outpatient Cardiac Telemetry (A52995). Available to be accessed at Novitas Solutions, Inc., Medical Policy Search page: https://www.novitas-solutions.com/webcenter/portal/MedicareJL/pagebyid?contentId=00024370

Medicaid:

For members enrolled in Medicaid and NJ FamilyCare plans, Horizon BCBSNJ applies the above medical policy.

FIDE SNP:

For members enrolled in a Fully Integrated Dual Eligible Special Needs Plan (FIDE-SNP): (1) to the extent the service is covered under the Medicare portion of the member’s benefit package, the above Medicare Coverage statement applies; and (2) to the extent the service is not covered under the Medicare portion of the member’s benefit package, the above Medicaid Coverage statement applies.

Policy Guidelines: (Information to guide medical necessity determination based on the criteria contained within the policy statements above.)

The available evidence has suggested that long-term monitoring for atrial fibrillation postablation or after cryptogenic stroke is associated with improved outcomes, but the specific type of monitoring associated with the best outcomes is not well-defined. Trials demonstrating improved outcomes have used either event monitors or implantable monitors. In addition, there are individual patient considerations that may make 1 type of monitor preferable over another.

Therefore, for the evaluation of patients with cryptogenic stroke who have had a negative standard workup for atrial fibrillation including 24-hour Holter monitoring, or for the evaluation of atrial fibrillation after an ablation procedure, the use of long-term monitoring with an external event monitor, OR a continuous ambulatory monitor that records and stores information for periods longer than 48 hours, OR an implantable ambulatory monitor may be considered medically necessary for patients who meet the criteria outlined above.
________________________________________________________________________________________

Horizon BCBSNJ Medical Policy Development Process:

This Horizon BCBSNJ Medical Policy (the “Medical Policy”) has been developed by Horizon BCBSNJ’s Medical Policy Committee (the “Committee”) consistent with generally accepted standards of medical practice, and reflects Horizon BCBSNJ’s view of the subject health care services, supplies or procedures, and in what circumstances they are deemed to be medically necessary or experimental/ investigational in nature. This Medical Policy also considers whether and to what degree the subject health care services, supplies or procedures are clinically appropriate, in terms of type, frequency, extent, site and duration and if they are considered effective for the illnesses, injuries or diseases discussed. Where relevant, this Medical Policy considers whether the subject health care services, supplies or procedures are being requested primarily for the convenience of the covered person or the health care provider. It may also consider whether the services, supplies or procedures are more costly than an alternative service or sequence of services, supplies or procedures that are at least as likely to produce equivalent therapeutic or diagnostic results as to the diagnosis or treatment of the relevant illness, injury or disease. In reaching its conclusion regarding what it considers to be the generally accepted standards of medical practice, the Committee reviews and considers the following: all credible scientific evidence published in peer-reviewed medical literature generally recognized by the relevant medical community, physician and health care provider specialty society recommendations, the views of physicians and health care providers practicing in relevant clinical areas (including, but not limited to, the prevailing opinion within the appropriate specialty) and any other relevant factor as determined by applicable State and Federal laws and regulations.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Index:
Ambulatory Event Monitors and Mobile Cardiac Outpatient Telemetry
Ambulatory Event Monitors and Mobile Outpatient Cardiac Telemetry
Patient-Activated External Ambulatory Event Monitors
Auto-Activated External Ambulatory Event Monitors
Mobile Outpatient Cardiac Telemetry
MCOT
Zio Event Card
REKA E100 System
Reveal Insertable Loop Recorder
CardioNet MCOT
HEARTLink II System
Vital Signs Transmitter (VST)
LifeStar Ambulatory Cardiac Telemetry (ACT) System
VectraplexECG System
Zio® Patch System
BodyGuardian Remote Monitoring System™
Reveal® XT ICM
VectraplexECG™ System
Confirm Rx Insertable™ Cardiac Monitor
Explorer™ Looping Monitor
LifeStar AF Express™ Auto-Detect Looping Monitor
King of Hearts Express® AF
LifeStar Mobile Cardiac Telemetry
SEEQ Mobile Cardiac Telemetry

References:
1. Moya A, Sutton R, Ammirati F, et al. Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of syncope (version 2009). Eur Heart J. Nov 2009; 30(21): 2631-71. PMID 19713422

2. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Transient loss of consciousness ('blackouts') in over 16s [CG109]. 2014; https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg109. Accessed May 6, 2020.

3. Raviele A, Giada F, Bergfeldt L, et al. Management of patients with palpitations: a position paper from the European Heart Rhythm Association. Europace. Jul 2011; 13(7): 920-34. PMID 21697315

4. January CT, Wann LS, Alpert JS, et al. 2014 AHA/ACC/HRS guideline for the management of patients with atrial fibrillation: executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on practice guidelines and the Heart Rhythm Society. Circulation. Dec 02 2014; 130(23): 2071-104. PMID 24682348

5. Mittal S, Movsowitz C, Steinberg JS. Ambulatory external electrocardiographic monitoring: focus on atrial fibrillation. J Am Coll Cardiol. Oct 18 2011; 58(17): 1741-9. PMID 21996384

6. Christensen LM, Krieger DW, Hojberg S, et al. Paroxysmal atrial fibrillation occurs often in cryptogenic ischaemic stroke. Final results from the SURPRISE study. Eur J Neurol. Jun 2014; 21(6): 884-9. PMID 24628954

7. Hoefman E, Bindels PJ, van Weert HC. Efficacy of diagnostic tools for detecting cardiac arrhythmias: systematic literature search. Neth Heart J. Nov 2010; 18(11): 543-51. PMID 21113379

8. Steinhubl SR, Waalen J, Edwards AM, et al. Effect of a Home-Based Wearable Continuous ECG Monitoring Patch on Detection of Undiagnosed Atrial Fibrillation: The mSToPS Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. Jul 10 2018; 320(2): 146-155. PMID 29998336

9. Farris GR, Smith BG, Oates ET, et al. New atrial fibrillation diagnosed by 30-day rhythm monitoring. Am Heart J. Mar 2019; 209: 29-35. PMID 30639611

10. Turakhia MP, Hoang DD, Zimetbaum P, et al. Diagnostic utility of a novel leadless arrhythmia monitoring device. Am J Cardiol. Aug 15 2013; 112(4): 520-4. PMID 23672988

11. Barrett PM, Komatireddy R, Haaser S, et al. Comparison of 24-hour Holter monitoring with 14-day novel adhesive patch electrocardiographic monitoring. Am J Med. Jan 2014; 127(1): 95.e11-7. PMID 24384108

12. Solomon MD, Yang J, Sung SH, et al. Incidence and timing of potentially high-risk arrhythmias detected through long term continuous ambulatory electrocardiographic monitoring. BMC Cardiovasc Disord. Feb 17 2016; 16: 35. PMID 26883019

13. Wineinger NE, Barrett PM, Zhang Y, et al. Identification of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation subtypes in over 13,000 individuals. Heart Rhythm. Jan 2019; 16(1): 26-30. PMID 30118885

14. Go AS, Reynolds K, Yang J, et al. Association of Burden of Atrial Fibrillation With Risk of Ischemic Stroke in Adults With Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation: The KP-RHYTHM Study. JAMA Cardiol. Jul 01 2018; 3(7): 601-608. PMID 29799942

15. Bolourchi M, Batra AS. Diagnostic yield of patch ambulatory electrocardiogram monitoring in children (from a national registry). Am J Cardiol. Mar 01 2015; 115(5): 630-4. PMID 25591894

16. Eisenberg EE, Carlson SK, Doshi RH, et al. Chronic ambulatory monitoring: results of a large single-center experience. J Innovations Cardiac Rhythm Manage. Nov 2014;5:1818-1823.

17. Schreiber D, Sattar A, Drigalla D, et al. Ambulatory cardiac monitoring for discharged emergency department patients with possible cardiac arrhythmias. West J Emerg Med. Mar 2014; 15(2): 194-8. PMID 24672611

18. Mullis AH, Ayoub K, Shah J, et al. Fluctuations in premature ventricular contraction burden can affect medical assessment and management. Heart Rhythm. Oct 2019; 16(10): 1570-1574. PMID 31004780

19. Reed MJ, Grubb NR, Lang CC, et al. Diagnostic yield of an ambulatory patch monitor in patients with unexplained syncope after initial evaluation in the emergency department: the PATCH-ED study. Emerg Med J. Aug 2018; 35(8): 477-485. PMID 29921622

20. Eysenck W, Freemantle N, Sulke N. A randomized trial evaluating the accuracy of AF detection by four external ambulatory ECG monitors compared to permanent pacemaker AF detection. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. Apr 2020; 57(3): 361-369. PMID 30741360

21. Kabali C, Xie X, Higgins C. Long-Term Continuous Ambulatory ECG Monitors and External Cardiac Loop Recorders for Cardiac Arrhythmia: A Health Technology Assessment. Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2017; 17(1): 1-56. PMID 28194254

22. Balmelli N, Naegeli B, Bertel O. Diagnostic yield of automatic and patient-triggered ambulatory cardiac event recording in the evaluation of patients with palpitations, dizziness, or syncope. Clin Cardiol. Apr 2003; 26(4): 173-6. PMID 12708623

23. Ermis C, Zhu AX, Pham S, et al. Comparison of automatic and patient-activated arrhythmia recordings by implantable loop recorders in the evaluation of syncope. Am J Cardiol. Oct 01 2003; 92(7): 815-9. PMID 14516882

24. Reiffel JA, Schwarzberg R, Murry M. Comparison of autotriggered memory loop recorders versus standard loop recorders versus 24-hour Holter monitors for arrhythmia detection. Am J Cardiol. May 01 2005; 95(9): 1055-9. PMID 15842970

25. Dagres N, Kottkamp H, Piorkowski C, et al. :Influence of the duration of Holter monitoring on the detection of arrhythmia recurrences after catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: implications for patient follow-up. Int J Cardiol. Mar 18 2010; 139(3): 305-6. PMID 18990460

26. Pokushalov E, Romanov A, Corbucci G, et al. Ablation of paroxysmal and persistent atrial fibrillation: 1-year follow-up through continuous subcutaneous monitoring. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. Apr 2011; 22(4): 369-75. PMID 20958836

27. Chao TF, Lin YJ, Tsao HM, et al. CHADS(2) and CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc scores in the prediction of clinical outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation after catheter ablation. J Am Coll Cardiol. Nov 29 2011; 58(23): 2380-5. PMID 22115643

28. Kapa S, Epstein AE, Callans DJ, et al. Assessing arrhythmia burden after catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation using an implantable loop recorder: the ABACUS study. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. Aug 2013; 24(8): 875-81. PMID 23577826

29. Verma A, Champagne J, Sapp J, et al. Discerning the incidence of symptomatic and asymptomatic episodes of atrial fibrillation before and after catheter ablation (DISCERN AF): a prospective, multicenter study. JAMA Intern Med. Jan 28 2013; 173(2): 149-56. PMID 23266597

30. Themistoclakis S, Corrado A, Marchlinski FE, et al. The risk of thromboembolism and need for oral anticoagulation after successful atrial fibrillation ablation. J Am Coll Cardiol. Feb 23 2010; 55(8): 735-43. PMID 20170810

31. Gumbinger C, Krumsdorf U, Veltkamp R, et al. Continuous monitoring versus HOLTER ECG for detection of atrial fibrillation in patients with stroke. Eur J Neurol. Feb 2012; 19(2): 253-7. PMID 21895885

32. Lazzaro MA, Krishnan K, Prabhakaran S. Detection of atrial fibrillation with concurrent holter monitoring and continuous cardiac telemetry following ischemic stroke and transient ischemic attack. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. Feb 2012; 21(2): 89-93. PMID 20656504

33. Cotter PE, Martin PJ, Ring L, et al. Incidence of atrial fibrillation detected by implantable loop recorders in unexplained stroke. Neurology. Apr 23 2013; 80(17): 1546-50. PMID 23535493

34. Miller DJ, Khan MA, Schultz LR, et al. Outpatient cardiac telemetry detects a high rate of atrial fibrillation in cryptogenic stroke. J Neurol Sci. Jan 15 2013; 324(1-2): 57-61. PMID 23102659

35. Sposato LA, Cipriano LE, Saposnik G, et al. Diagnosis of atrial fibrillation after stroke and transient ischaemic attack: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Neurol. Apr 2015; 14(4): 377-87. PMID 25748102

36. Kishore A, Vail A, Majid A, et al. Detection of atrial fibrillation after ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Stroke. Feb 2014; 45(2): 520-6. PMID 24385275

37. Kamel H, Navi BB, Elijovich L, et al. Pilot randomized trial of outpatient cardiac monitoring after cryptogenic stroke. Stroke. Feb 2013; 44(2): 528-30. PMID 23192756

38. Higgins P, MacFarlane PW, Dawson J, et al. Noninvasive cardiac event monitoring to detect atrial fibrillation after ischemic stroke: a randomized, controlled trial. Stroke. Sep 2013; 44(9): 2525-31. PMID 23899913

39. Sinha AM, Diener HC, Morillo CA, et al. Cryptogenic Stroke and underlying Atrial Fibrillation (CRYSTAL AF): design and rationale. Am Heart J. Jul 2010; 160(1): 36-41.e1. PMID 20598970

40. Sanna T, Diener HC, Passman RS, et al. Cryptogenic stroke and underlying atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. Jun 26 2014; 370(26): 2478-86. PMID 24963567

41. Brachmann J, Morillo CA, Sanna T, et al. Uncovering Atrial Fibrillation Beyond Short-Term Monitoring in Cryptogenic Stroke Patients: Three-Year Results From the Cryptogenic Stroke and Underlying Atrial Fibrillation Trial. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. Jan 2016; 9(1): e003333. PMID 26763225

42. Gladstone DJ, Spring M, Dorian P, et al. Atrial fibrillation in patients with cryptogenic stroke. N Engl J Med. Jun 26 2014; 370(26): 2467-77. PMID 24963566

43. Kaura A, Sztriha L, Chan FK, et al. Early prolonged ambulatory cardiac monitoring in stroke (EPACS): an open-label randomised controlled trial. Eur J Med Res. Jul 26 2019; 24(1): 25. PMID 31349792

44. Ritter MA, Kochhauser S, Duning T, et al. Occult atrial fibrillation in cryptogenic stroke: detection by 7-day electrocardiogram versus implantable cardiac monitors. Stroke. May 2013; 44(5): 1449-52. PMID 23449264

45. Etgen T, Hochreiter M, Mundel M, et al. Insertable cardiac event recorder in detection of atrial fibrillation after cryptogenic stroke: an audit report. Stroke. Jul 2013; 44(7): 2007-9. PMID 23674523

46. Tung CE, Su D, Turakhia MP, et al. Diagnostic Yield of Extended Cardiac Patch Monitoring in Patients with Stroke or TIA. Front Neurol. 2014; 5: 266. PMID 25628595

47. Rosenberg MA, Samuel M, Thosani A, et al. Use of a noninvasive continuous monitoring device in the management of atrial fibrillation: a pilot study. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. Mar 2013; 36(3): 328-33. PMID 23240827

48. Savelieva I, Camm AJ. Clinical relevance of silent atrial fibrillation: prevalence, prognosis, quality of life, and management. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. Jun 2000; 4(2): 369-82. PMID 10936003

49. Israel CW, Gronefeld G, Ehrlich JR, et al. Long-term risk of recurrent atrial fibrillation as documented by an implantable monitoring device: implications for optimal patient care. J Am Coll Cardiol. Jan 07 2004; 43(1): 47-52. PMID 14715182

50. Page RL, Wilkinson WE, Clair WK, et al. Asymptomatic arrhythmias in patients with symptomatic paroxysmal atrial fibrillation and paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia. Circulation. Jan 1994; 89(1): 224-7. PMID 8281651

51. Hart RG, Pearce LA, Rothbart RM, et al. Stroke with intermittent atrial fibrillation: incidence and predictors during aspirin therapy. Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation Investigators. J Am Coll Cardiol. Jan 2000; 35(1): 183-7. PMID 10636278

52. Hohnloser SH, Pajitnev D, Pogue J, et al. Incidence of stroke in paroxysmal versus sustained atrial fibrillation in patients taking oral anticoagulation or combined antiplatelet therapy: an ACTIVE W Substudy. J Am Coll Cardiol. Nov 27 2007; 50(22): 2156-61. PMID 18036454

53. Ganesan AN, Chew DP, Hartshorne T, et al. The impact of atrial fibrillation type on the risk of thromboembolism, mortality, and bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Heart J. May 21 2016; 37(20): 1591-602. PMID 26888184

54. Fitzmaurice DA, Hobbs FD, Jowett S, et al. Screening versus routine practice in detection of atrial fibrillation in patients aged 65 or over: cluster randomised controlled trial. BMJ. Aug 25 2007; 335(7616): 383. PMID 17673732

55. Halcox JPJ, Wareham K, Cardew A, et al. Assessment of Remote Heart Rhythm Sampling Using the AliveCor Heart Monitor to Screen for Atrial Fibrillation: The REHEARSE-AF Study. Circulation. Nov 07 2017; 136(19): 1784-1794. PMID 28851729

56. Turakhia MP, Ullal AJ, Hoang DD, et al. Feasibility of extended ambulatory electrocardiogram monitoring to identify silent atrial fibrillation in high-risk patients: the Screening Study for Undiagnosed Atrial Fibrillation (STUDY-AF). Clin Cardiol. May 2015; 38(5): 285-92. PMID 25873476

57. Heckbert SR, Austin TR, Jensen PN, et al. Yield and consistency of arrhythmia detection with patch electrocardiographic monitoring: The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis. J Electrocardiol. Nov 2018; 51(6): 997-1002. PMID 30497763

58. Solbiati M, Casazza G, Dipaola F, et al. The diagnostic yield of implantable loop recorders in unexplained syncope: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Cardiol. Mar 15 2017; 231: 170-176. PMID 28052814

59. Burkowitz J, Merzenich C, Grassme K, et al. Insertable cardiac monitors in the diagnosis of syncope and the detection of atrial fibrillation: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Prev Cardiol. Aug 2016; 23(12): 1261-72. PMID 26864396

60. Da Costa A, Defaye P, Romeyer-Bouchard C, et al. Clinical impact of the implantable loop recorder in patients with isolated syncope, bundle branch block and negative workup: a randomized multicentre prospective study. Arch Cardiovasc Dis. Mar 2013; 106(3): 146-54. PMID 23582676

61. Farwell DJ, Freemantle N, Sulke AN. Use of implantable loop recorders in the diagnosis and management of syncope. Eur Heart J. Jul 2004; 25(14): 1257-63. PMID 15246645

62. Krahn AD, Klein GJ, Yee R, et al. Randomized assessment of syncope trial: conventional diagnostic testing versus a prolonged monitoring strategy. Circulation. Jul 03 2001; 104(1): 46-51. PMID 11435336

63. Afzal MR, Gunda S, Waheed S, et al. Role of Outpatient Cardiac Rhythm Monitoring in Cryptogenic Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. Oct 2015; 38(10): 1236-45. PMID 26172621

64. Podoleanu C, DaCosta A, Defaye P, et al. Early use of an implantable loop recorder in syncope evaluation: a randomized study in the context of the French healthcare system (FRESH study). Arch Cardiovasc Dis. Oct 2014; 107(10): 546-52. PMID 25241220

65. Giada F, Gulizia M, Francese M, et al. Recurrent unexplained palpitations (RUP) study comparison of implantable loop recorder versus conventional diagnostic strategy. J Am Coll Cardiol. May 15 2007; 49(19): 1951-6. PMID 17498580

66. Magnusson PM, Olszowka M, Wallhagen M, et al. Outcome of implantable loop recorder evaluation. Cardiol J. 2018; 25(3): 363-370. PMID 28840588

67. Maines M, Zorzi A, Tomasi G, et al. Clinical impact, safety, and accuracy of the remotely monitored implantable loop recorder Medtronic Reveal LINQTM. Europace. Jun 01 2018; 20(6): 1050-1057. PMID 29016753

68. Ciconte G, Saviano M, Giannelli L, et al. Atrial fibrillation detection using a novel three-vector cardiac implantable monitor: the atrial fibrillation detect study. Europace. Jul 01 2017; 19(7): 1101-1108. PMID 27702865

69. Bhangu J, McMahon CG, Hall P, et al. Long-term cardiac monitoring in older adults with unexplained falls and syncope. Heart. May 2016; 102(9): 681-6. PMID 26822427

70. Nolker G, Mayer J, Boldt LH, et al. Performance of an Implantable Cardiac Monitor to Detect Atrial Fibrillation: Results of the DETECT AF Study. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. Dec 2016; 27(12): 1403-1410. PMID 27565119

71. Sanders P, Purerfellner H, Pokushalov E, et al. Performance of a new atrial fibrillation detection algorithm in a miniaturized insertable cardiac monitor: Results from the Reveal LINQ Usability Study. Heart Rhythm. Jul 2016; 13(7): 1425-30. PMID 26961298

72. Ziegler PD, Rogers JD, Ferreira SW, et al. Real-World Experience with Insertable Cardiac Monitors to Find Atrial Fibrillation in Cryptogenic Stroke. Cerebrovasc Dis. 2015; 40(3-4): 175-81. PMID 26314298

73. Edvardsson N, Garutti C, Rieger G, et al. Unexplained syncope: implications of age and gender on patient characteristics and evaluation, the diagnostic yield of an implantable loop recorder, and the subsequent treatment. Clin Cardiol. Oct 2014; 37(10): 618-25. PMID 24890550

74. Hindricks G, Pokushalov E, Urban L, et al. Performance of a new leadless implantable cardiac monitor in detecting and quantifying atrial fibrillation: Results of the XPECT trial. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. Apr 2010; 3(2): 141-7. PMID 20160169

75. Hanke T, Charitos EI, Stierle U, et al. Twenty-four-hour holter monitor follow-up does not provide accurate heart rhythm status after surgical atrial fibrillation ablation therapy: up to 12 months experience with a novel permanently implantable heart rhythm monitor device. Circulation. Sep 15 2009; 120(11 Suppl): S177-84. PMID 19752365

76. Mittal S, Sanders P, Pokushalov E, et al. Safety Profile of a Miniaturized Insertable Cardiac Monitor: Results from Two Prospective Trials. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. Dec 2015; 38(12): 1464-9. PMID 26412309

77. Rothman SA, Laughlin JC, Seltzer J, et al. The diagnosis of cardiac arrhythmias: a prospective multi-center randomized study comparing mobile cardiac outpatient telemetry versus standard loop event monitoring. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. Mar 2007; 18(3): 241-7. PMID 17318994

78. Derkac WM, Finkelmeier JR, Horgan DJ, et al. Diagnostic yield of asymptomatic arrhythmias detected by mobile cardiac outpatient telemetry and autotrigger looping event cardiac monitors. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. Dec 2017; 28(12): 1475-1478. PMID 28940881

79. Kadish AH, Reiffel JA, Clauser J, et al. Frequency of serious arrhythmias detected with ambulatory cardiac telemetry. Am J Cardiol. May 01 2010; 105(9): 1313-6. PMID 20403485

80. Joshi AK, Kowey PR, Prystowsky EN, et al. First experience with a Mobile Cardiac Outpatient Telemetry (MCOT) system for the diagnosis and management of cardiac arrhythmia. Am J Cardiol. Apr 01 2005; 95(7): 878-81. PMID 15781022

81. Olson JA, Fouts AM, Padanilam BJ, et al. Utility of mobile cardiac outpatient telemetry for the diagnosis of palpitations, presyncope, syncope, and the assessment of therapy efficacy. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. May 2007; 18(5): 473-7. PMID 17343724

82. Saarel EV, Doratotaj S, Sterba R. Initial experience with novel mobile cardiac outpatient telemetry for children and adolescents with suspected arrhythmia. Congenit Heart Dis. Jan-Feb 2008; 3(1): 33-8. PMID 18373747

83. Tayal AH, Tian M, Kelly KM, et al. Atrial fibrillation detected by mobile cardiac outpatient telemetry in cryptogenic TIA or stroke. Neurology. Nov 18 2008; 71(21): 1696-701. PMID 18815386

84. Favilla CG, Ingala E, Jara J, et al. Predictors of finding occult atrial fibrillation after cryptogenic stroke. Stroke. May 2015; 46(5): 1210-5. PMID 25851771

85. Kalani R, Bernstein R, Passman R, et al. Low Yield of Mobile Cardiac Outpatient Telemetry after Cryptogenic Stroke in Patients with Extensive Cardiac Imaging. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. Sep 2015; 24(9): 2069-73. PMID 26139455

86. Narasimha D, Hanna N, Beck H, et al. Validation of a smartphone-based event recorder for arrhythmia detection. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. May 2018; 41(5): 487-494. PMID 29493801

87. Dorr M, Nohturfft V, Brasier N, et al. The WATCH AF Trial: SmartWATCHes for Detection of Atrial Fibrillation. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. Feb 2019; 5(2): 199-208. PMID 30784691

88. Steinberg JS, Varma N, Cygankiewicz I, et al. 2017 ISHNE-HRS expert consensus statement on ambulatory ECG and external cardiac monitoring/telemetry. Heart Rhythm. Jul 2017; 14(7): e55-e96. PMID 28495301

89. January CT, Wann LS, Calkins H, et al. 2019 AHA/ACC/HRS focused update of the 2014 AHA/ACC/HRS guideline for the management of patients with atrial fibrillation: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines and the Heart Rhythm Society. Heart Rhythm. Aug 2019; 16(8): e66-e93. PMID 30703530

90. Shen WK, Sheldon RS, Benditt DG, et al. 2017 ACC/AHA/HRS Guideline for the Evaluation and Management of Patients With Syncope: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines and the Heart Rhythm Society. J Am Coll Cardiol. Aug 01 2017; 70(5): 620-663. PMID 28286222

91. Al-Khatib SM, Stevenson WG, Ackerman MJ, et al. 2017 AHA/ACC/HRS guideline for management of patients with ventricular arrhythmias and the prevention of sudden cardiac death: Executive summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines and the Heart Rhythm Society. Heart Rhythm. Oct 2018; 15(10): e190-e252. PMID 29097320

92. Calkins H, Kuck KH, Cappato R, et al. 2012 HRS/EHRA/ECAS expert consensus statement on catheter and surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation: recommendations for patient selection, procedural techniques, patient management and follow-up, definitions, endpoints, and research trial design. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. Mar 2012; 33(2): 171-257. PMID 22382715

93. Calkins H, Hindricks G, Cappato R, et al. 2017 HRS/EHRA/ECAS/APHRS/SOLAECE expert consensus statement on catheter and surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation: Executive summary. J Arrhythm. Oct 2017; 33(5): 369-409. PMID 29021841

94. Brignole M, Vardas P, Hoffman E, et al. Indications for the use of diagnostic implantable and external ECG loop recorders. Europace. May 2009; 11(5): 671-87. PMID 19401342

95. Culebras A, Messe SR, Chaturvedi S, et al. Summary of evidence-based guideline update: prevention of stroke in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: report of the Guideline Development Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology. Neurology. Feb 25 2014; 82(8): 716-24. PMID 24566225

96. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). National Coverage Determination (NCD) for Electrocardiographic Services (20.15). 2004; https://www.cms.gov/medicare-coverage-database/details/ncd- details.aspx?MCDId=16&ExpandComments=n&McdName=Thomson+Micromedex+DrugDex+%C2%AE+Compe ndium+Revision+Request+-+CAG-00391&NCDId=179. Accessed May 6, 2020.


Codes:
(The list of codes is not intended to be all-inclusive and is included below for informational purposes only. Inclusion or exclusion of a procedure, diagnosis, drug or device code(s) does not constitute or imply authorization, certification, approval, offer of coverage or guarantee of payment.)

CPT*
    0295T
    0296T
    0297T
    0298T
    0498T
    33282
    33284
    93228
    93229
    93268
    93270
    93271
    93272

HCPCS
    E0616

* CPT only copyright 2020 American Medical Association. All rights reserved. CPT is a registered trademark of the American Medical Association.
_________________________________________________________________________________________

Medical policies can be highly technical and are designed for use by the Horizon BCBSNJ professional staff in making coverage determinations. Members referring to this policy should discuss it with their treating physician, and should refer to their specific benefit plan for the terms, conditions, limitations and exclusions of their coverage.

The Horizon BCBSNJ Medical Policy Manual is proprietary. It is to be used only as authorized by Horizon BCBSNJ and its affiliates. The contents of this Medical Policy are not to be copied, reproduced or circulated to other parties without the express written consent of Horizon BCBSNJ. The contents of this Medical Policy may be updated or changed without notice, unless otherwise required by law and/or regulation. However, benefit determinations are made in the context of medical policies existing at the time of the decision and are not subject to later revision as the result of a change in medical policy

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________