Brilliant! Terrific next step would be Bluetooth functionality for daily surveillance elsewhere by forwarding daily data feeds to a collection site, Rhythms intelligently surveilled for pathology and issues forwarded to the responsible MD. Wish I had more info on this device.

I've used this device several times. It's quite effective. The first generation of the device would not stay on the patient, however they have altered the adhesive. The biggest problem is reimbursement from insurance. On the last two I've used, after paying the company the scanning fee, my reimbursement was $2 less than the fee so I actually lost money. The technology isn't going to go very far if Cardiologists have to reach into their pockets just to use the device. But I still keep trying because I do like the technology especially for atrial fib burden

Can't wait...holter has such limitations, next step I would like to see is patch that could downloaded at home in real time..still like idea of something in use for 1 full week..not just 24-48 hrs...

So much better than getting wired up! (Afib) I've had both. You can almost forget you've got a Zio for the two weeks. The only problem is understandable: an adhesive that lasts two weeks? Amazing! But the device does shift on your skin and start to itch near the end of the stint. I'll live with it.

The way to go for accurate diagnosis.

Reimbursement is huge problem. Right now we have to pay $110 per device, we break even with Medicare and make a few buck on commercial insurance. But price now going to $220 per device. Outrageous!! Will completely prevent me from using it. Would lose money on every patient except a few commercial carriers. Nice device but will have to stop using it due to their pricing.

Having worn quite a few Holters over the years myself, I would find this to be a tremendous improvement. Pricing is obviously an issue, but I wonder how it compares with conventional hookup and interpretation charges, to say nothing of time/money involved in transportation to and from the office?

thanks for excellent points and perspective noted above. It will be interesting to see how the cost issues get settled, and hopefully soon we will have data on yield vs 24 h Holter. The adhesive clearly works pretty well, and the convenience factor for the patient is quite impressive.

Excellent product.I am sure it will take off along with smart phone app or wireless 4 G remote date monitoring.

Definitely a need for t he future, true readings for the patient ot just 12 - 24 hours, the monitor placed at a time of relaxation, no stress,no exercise the IMperfect time, 3 days to a week would produce the results needed. at last future is more positive.

perfect solution for perfect results. picking up all arrhythmias, at normal times, not just at a time of no stress, relaxation, no exercise, thus no real results. 3 to 7 days would result in every response, all A.F. ..at last the future is positive.

perfect solution for perfect results. picking up all arrhythmias, at normal times, not just at a time of no stress, relaxation, no exercise, thus no real results. 3 to 7 days would result in every response, all A.F. ..at last the future is positive.

And what happened to Microvolt T-Wave Alternans (MTWA) to determine susceptibility to sudden cardiac arrest? It's non-invasive, results are obtained in 30 minutes, it has FDA approval and a reimbursement code, and NASA uses it on astronauts. For more information about MTWA, go to www.cambridgeheart.com.

Looks like a great device and excited to see the data coming down the pike. BUT.... I love real-time monitoring. Just started to use ecardio in the last couple of months (I have no disclosures). Within the first week of ordering thirty day monitors-diagnosed many with afib RVR who would have been missed with a 24 hour monitor. A traditional event monitor would not have caught them. Although they had come for palpitory awareness or other symptoms, almost 100% had NO symptoms during their periods of arrhythmia. Yesterday, handed a strip with non sustained wide complex tachycardia-again, no symptoms and on her 20th day of monitoring. Like the concerns echo'd above, I was getting reimbursed for the event monitors, holters, etc. but with real time monitoring, I'm not seeing the reimbursement that was advertised. I am hoping the patient will not have out of pocket cost-but yet to be seen. Real time monitoring is the holy grail of arrhythmia detection-certainly works but our system of reimbursement with multiple payers may kill this extremely efficacious innovation. I will bet it is cost effective, but am unaware of any studies that support that in our system. If just one stroke saved........