Make informed clinical decisions with accurate AF burden monitoring.

Watch video series

Make data-driven decisions.

Measuring atrial fibrillation (AF) burden can help you build a better diagnostic picture and guide clinical treatment decisions for AF patients. AF burden is the amount of time a patient is in AF over a period of time:

  • Number of episodes
  • How long the AF episodes last

It is the most reliable and objective measure of AF recurrence post-ablation, as it includes both asymptomatic and symptomatic episodes.1

~90% of AF episodes may be asymptomatic.2
30-50% of patients experience recurrences within one year after their ablation.3,4

Short-term cardiac monitoring is not enough.

Are you relying on short-term cardiac monitors and symptom reporting to track your patients’ AF episodes? Typical monitoring times of 30 days or less may be insufficient when patients have intermittent symptoms. And because many episodes are asymptomatic, AF symptoms are not a reliable indicator of AF episodes.5

Continuous cardiac monitoring with the LINQ II insertable cardiac monitor (ICM) captures AF burden, heart rate variability, and daily activity data to help you assess treatment effectiveness and determine when to try a new approach. In addition, AF ablation patients with an ICM experienced fewer severe cardiovascular events, including AF-related hospitalizations, as well as lower associated costs.6

For how long should an AF patient be monitored? Watch experts discuss here.


When managing your AF patients, trust the most accurate ICM.7-20

The LINQ II ICM with AccuRhythm™ AI algorithms features an AF algorithm that reduces false alerts by 74.1% while preserving 99.3% of true alerts.21 The LINQ II ICM provides you with longitudinal data to objectively determine both asymptomatic and symptomatic AF. This data results in the measure of true AF burden to effectively guide therapy decisions such as re-ablation, medication changes, and anticoagulation management.22-25

The LINQ II ICM continuously monitors AF patients for up to 4.5 years, transmitting important data that might otherwise be missed with short-term monitors or by relying on symptom reporting.

Click here to request a LINQ II ICM product demonstration by a Medtronic representative.

†  Nominal settings.

Watch the experts: AF burden video series

What is the best cardiac monitoring strategy to measure AF burden?

For how long should an AF patient be monitored?

What data do you capture with the LINQ II ICM?


™Third-party brands are trademarks of their respective owners.



Andrade JG, Champagne J, Dubuc M, et al. Cryoballoon or Radiofrequency Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation Assessed by Continuous Monitoring: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Circulation. November 26, 2019;140(22):1779-1788.


Strickberger SA, Ip J, Saksena S, Curry K, Bahnson TD, Ziegler PD. Relationship between atrial tachyarrhythmias and symptoms. Heart Rhythm. February 2005;2(2):125-131.


Ganesan AN, Shipp NJ, Brooks AG, et al. Long-term outcomes of catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Heart Assoc. March 18, 2013;2(2):e004549. 


Van der Heijden CAJ, Vroomen M, Luermans JG, Vos R, et al. Hybrid versus catheter ablation in patients with persistent and longstanding persistent atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. September 1, 2019;56(3):433-443.


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. January 28, 2013;173(2):149-156.


Mansour MC, Gillen EM, Garman A, et al. Healthcare utilization and outcomes in atrial fibrillation ablation patients with and without insertable cardiac monitoring. Heart Rhythm O2. January 7, 2022;3(1):79-90.


Pürerfellner H, Sanders P, Sarkar S, et al. Adapting detection sensitivity based on evidence of irregular sinus arrhythmia to improve atrial fibrillation detection in insertable cardiac monitors. Europace. November 1, 2018;20(FI_3):f321-f328.


Nölker G, Mayer J, Boldt L, et al. Performance of an Implantable Cardiac Monitor to Detect Atrial Fibrillation: Results of the DETECT AF Study. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. December 2016;27(12):1403-1410.


Confirm Rx™* ICM K163407 FDA Clearance Letter. 2017.


Confirm Rx ICM K182981 FDA Clearance Letter. 2019.


Jot Dx™* ICM K212206 FDA Clearance Letter. 2021.


Monitoring Devices Merlin™* PCS Help Manual for SJM Confirm™*, Confirm Rx ICM, Jot Dx Manual. 2021.


BIOTRONIK BioMonitor™* 2 Technical Manual. 2017.


BIOTRONIK BIOMONITOR III Technical Manual. 2020.


BIOTRONIK BIOMONITOR IIIm Technical Manual. 2020.


BIOTRONIK BIOMONITOR III. K190548 FDA Clearance. 2019.


BIOTRONIK BIOMONITOR IIIm. K201865 FDA Clearance. 2020.


Lux-Dx™* ICM K212206 FDA Clearance Letter. 2020.


Lux-Dx ICM User Manual. 2020.


ICM Published Accuracy Comparison Guide. 2021.


Radtke A, et al. Artificial Intelligence Enables Dramatic Reduction of False Atrial Fibrillation Alerts from Insertable Cardiac Monitors. Presented at Heart Rhythm Society Conference 2021.


Passman R, Leong-Sit P, Andrei AC, et al. Targeted Anticoagulation for Atrial Fibrillation Guided by Continuous Rhythm Assessment With an Insertable Cardiac Monitor: The Rhythm Evaluation for Anticoagulation With Continuous Monitoring (REACT.COM) Pilot Study. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. March 2016;27(3):264-270.


Zuern CS, Kilias A, Berlitz P, et al. Anticoagulation after catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation guided by implantable cardiac monitors. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. June 2015;38(6):688-693.


Mascarenhas DAN, Farooq MU, Ziegler PD, Kantharia BK. Role of insertable cardiac monitors in anticoagulation therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation at high risk of bleeding. Europace. June 2016;18(6):799-806.


Pothineni NVK, Amankwah N, Santangeli P, et al. Continuous rhythm monitoring-guided anticoagulation after atrial fibrillation ablation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. February 2021;32(2):345-353.