Introduction/Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare a novel small event recorder device, the Carnation Ambulatory Monitor (CAM), with a stan-dard Holter. Animals: Nineteen adult dogs.Material and methods: Comparative and explorative study. The two devices were simultaneously applied for approximately 24 h.Results: analysis time (p=0.013) and percentage of artefacts (p<0.001) were great-er for the CAM (110 min [40-264]; and 9% [0-34], respectively) compared to a stan-dard Holter (30 min [18-270]; and 0.3% [0-9], respectively). The total number of beats (p=0.017) and maximum (p=0.02) and mean (p=0.037) heart rates were low-er for the CAM (113,806 +/- 23,619 beats; 227 +/- 35 bpm; and 88 +/- 22 bpm, respec-tively) compared to the standard Holter (131,640 +/- 40,037 beats; 260 +/- 64 bpm; and 92 +/- 26 bpm, respectively). The minimal heart rate (p=0.725), number of pauses (p=0.078), duration of the longest pause (p=0.087), number of ventricular ectopic beats (p=0.55), ventricular couplets (p=0.186), ventricular triplets (p=0.203), ventricular tachycardia (p=0.05), Lown grade (p=0.233), presence or absence of ventricular bigeminy, trigeminy, supraventricular tachycardia, and at-rial fibrillation (p=0.98) did not differ. The CAM missed some relevant events, like complex ventricular arrhythmias, and the Lown grade did not match in 5/19 dogs when comparing the devices.Conclusions: CAM can be used to record ECG traces in dogs over a prolonged period, allowing to detect arrhythmias. Due to some clinically relevant limitations, includ-ing a higher percentage of artefacts, a longer reading time (which precludes quan-titative counts of >300VPCs), and underestimation of complex ventricular arrhythmias, the CAM appears not suitable for quantitative arrhythmia analysis in dogs.(c) 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
