Remote Monitoring of Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators

Remote monitoring of cardiac implantable electronic devices using smart device interface versus radiofrequency-based interface: A systematic review

Background

Guidelines recommended remote monitoring (RM) in managing patients with Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices. In recent years, smart device (phone or tablet) monitoring-based RM (SM-RM) was introduced. This study aims to systematically review SM-RM versus bedside monitor RM (BM-RM) using radiofrequency in terms of compliance, connectivity, and episode transmission time.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review, searching three international databases from inception until July 2023 for studies comparing SM-RM (intervention group) versus BM-RM (control group).

Results

Two matched studies (21 978 patients) were retrieved (SM-RM arm: 9642 patients, BM-RM arm: 12 336 patients). There is significantly higher compliance among SM-RM patients compared with BM-RM patients in both pacemaker and defibrillator patients. Manyam et al. found that more SM-RM patients than BM-RM patients transmitted at least once (98.1% vs. 94.3%, p < .001), and Tarakji et al. showed that SM-RM patients have higher success rates of scheduled transmissions than traditional BM-RM methods (SM-RM: 94.6%, pacemaker manual: 56.3%, pacemaker wireless: 77.0%, defibrillator wireless: 87.1%). There were higher enrolment rates, completed scheduled and patient-initiated transmissions, shorter episode transmission time, and higher connectivity among SM-RM patients compared to BM-RM patients. Younger patients (aged <75) had more patient-initiated transmissions, and a higher proportion had ≥10 transmissions compared with older patients (aged ≥75) in both SM-RM and BM-RM groups.

Conclusion

SM-RM is a step in the right direction, with good compliance, connectivity, and shorter episode transmission time, empowering patients to be in control of their health. Further research on cost-effectiveness and long-term clinical outcomes can be carried out.

Contemporary Advances in Cardiac Remote Monitoring: A Comprehensive, Updated Mini-Review

Over the past decade, remote monitoring (RM) has become an increasingly popular way to improve healthcare and health outcomes. Modern cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) are capable of recording an increasing amount of data related to CIED function, arrhythmias, physiological status and hemodynamic parameters, providing in-depth and updated information on patient cardiovascular function. The extensive use of RM for patients with CIED allows for early diagnosis and rapid assessment of relevant issues, both clinical and technical, as well as replacing outpatient follow-up improving overall management without compromise safety. This approach is recommended by current guidelines for all eligible patients affected by different chronic cardiac conditions including either brady- and tachy-arrhythmias and heart failure. Beyond to clinical advantages, RM has demonstrated cost-effectiveness and is associated with elevated levels of patient satisfaction. Future perspectives include improving security, interoperability and diagnostic power as well as to engage patients with digital health technology. This review aims to update existing data concerning clinical outcomes in patients managed with RM in the wide spectrum of cardiac arrhythmias and Hear Failure (HF), disclosing also about safety, effectiveness, patient satisfaction and cost-saving.

Ten years of subcutaneous defibrillator therapy: Consolidated clinical evidence and future perspectives

The subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (S-ICD) was developed as an alternative to the traditional transvenous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (TV-ICD), aiming to provide easier implantation, simplified detection algorithm of malignant ventricular arrhythmias and prevention from placing components in the cardiovascular system. The S-ICD is implanted subcutaneously or intramuscularly with the generator placed in the left midaxillary line and the lead tunneled subcutaneously in the left para-sternal region. Preimplant electrocardiogram screening is recommended to prevent implantation in patients at high risk of T wave over-sensing. Currently, the S-ICD is unsuitable for patients requiring pacing or cardiac resynchronization. Since the beginning, the S-ICD underwent extensive preclinical investigation until the first prospective multicentre trial demonstrating high efficacy and safety led to market release. While earlier studies focused on younger patients with higher ejection fraction, more recent studies showed favorable outcomes even in patients with comorbidities similar to those typically observed in patients receiving TV-ICD. The development of second and third generation devices has contributed to reduce inappropriate shocks and overcome previous limitations. The aim of this paper is to review the evidence in the literature over the past decade supporting S-ICD as a valid alternative to TV-ICD in terms of safety and efficacy, highlighting the improvements in technology, as well as outcomes.

Utilization of the remote monitoring of cardiac implantable electronic devices in a diverse demographic cohort: Insights from a single-center observation

BACKGROUND

Despite its clinical benefits, patient compliance to remote monitoring (RM) of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) varies and remains under-studied in diverse populations.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to evaluate RM compliance, clinical outcomes, and identify demographic and socioeconomic factors affecting RM in a diverse urban population in New York.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included patients enrolled in CIED RM at Montefiore Medical Center between December 2017 and May 2022. RM compliance was defined as the percentage of days compliant to RM transmission divided by the total prescribed days of RM. Patients were censored when they were lost to follow-up or at the time of death. The cohorts were categorized into low (≤30%), intermediate (31-69%), and high (≥70%) RM compliance groups. Statistical analyses were conducted accordingly.

RESULTS

Among 853 patients, median RM compliance was 55%. Age inversely affected compliance (p < .001), and high compliance was associated with guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) usage and implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD)/cardiac resynchronization defibrillator (CRTD) devices. The low-compliance group had a higher mortality rate and fewer regular clinic visits (p < .001) than high-compliance group. Socioeconomic factors did not significantly impact compliance, while Asians showed higher compliance compared with Whites (OR 3.67; 95% CI 1.08-12.43; p = .04). Technical issues were the main reason for non-compliance.

CONCLUSION

We observed suboptimal compliance to RM, which occurred most frequently in older patients. Clinic visit compliance, optimal medical therapy, and lower mortality were associated with higher compliance, whereas insufficient understanding of RM usage was the chief barrier to compliance.

A Patient-Centered Intervention Reduces Disparities in Remote Monitoring in Patients With Implanted Cardiac Devices

BACKGROUND

Remote monitoring (RM) is recommended for patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices, yet many individuals, especially those living in underserved communities, fail to receive this guideline-directed care. Multilevel interventions that target patient and clinic-level barriers to RM care may be beneficial.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to evaluate a remotely delivered, patient-centered intervention to improve RM activation and adherence and reduce disparities in RM care.

METHODS

The intervention provides home delivery of remote monitor, phone-based education, monitor setup, and facilitation of first transmission. A retrospective cohort analysis was performed using RM data from 190,643 patients (71.6 ± 12.7 years of age, 40.5% female) implanted with a pacemaker or defibrillator at 4,195 U.S. clinics between October 2015 and October 2019. Outcomes included RM activation (12 weeks and 1-year postimplantation) and adherence to clinic-scheduled transmissions. Patients receiving a cardiovascular implantable electronic deviceimplant 0 to 730 days before (control group, n = 95,861) and after (intervention group, n = 94,782) intervention launch were compared using logistic regression and generalized estimating equations. Multivariable models included patient, clinic, and neighborhood socioeconomic characteristics.

RESULTS

The odds of achieving guideline-recommended activation were significantly higher in the intervention group at 12 weeks (OR: 2.99; 76.7% vs 60.9%; P < 0.001) and 1 year (OR: 3.05; 88.2% vs 79.3%; P < 0.001). Adherence to scheduled transmissions was also higher in the intervention group compared with the control group (OR: 2.18; 89.1% vs 81.9%; P < 0.001). Preintervention disparities in RM activation and adherence were reduced in underserved groups following the intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

A remotely delivered patient-centered intervention was associated with earlier activation and improved adherence to RM while reducing disparities in RM care.

Informational Postcards Increase Engagement with Remote Monitoring Among Veterans with Pacemakers and Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators: a Stepped-Wedge Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Remote monitoring (RM) of pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) reduces morbidity and mortality. However, many patients are not adherent to RM.

OBJECTIVE

To test the effect of informational postcards on RM adherence.

DESIGN/PATIENTS

Stepped-wedge randomized controlled trial among Veterans with pacemakers and ICDs.

INTERVENTION

In wave 1, Veterans who had sent at least 1 transmission within the past 2 years but had become non-adherent were randomly assigned to receive a postcard or no postcard. Those receiving postcards were randomized to 1 of 2 messages: (1) a"warning" postcard describing risks of non-adherence or (2) an "encouraging" postcard describing benefits of adherence. In wave 2, Veterans who had either not received a postcard in wave 1 or had since become non-adherent were mailed a postcard (again, randomized to 1 of 2 messages). Patients who did not send an RM transmission within 1 month were mailed a second, identical postcard.

MAIN MEASURES

Transmission within 70 days.

KEY RESULTS

Overall, 6351 Veterans were included. In waves 1 and 2, postcards were mailed to 5657 Veterans (2821 "warning" messages and 2836 "encouraging" messages). Wave 1 included 2178 Veterans as controls (i.e., not mailed a postcard), some of whom received a postcard in wave 2 if they remained non-adherent. In wave 2, 3473 postcards were sent. Of the 5657 patients mailed a postcard, 2756 (48.7%) sent an RM transmission within 70 days, compared to 530 (24.3%) of 2178 controls (absolute difference 24.4%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 22.2%, 26.6%). Of those who sent a transmission, 71.8% did so after the first postcard. Transmission rates at 70 days did not significantly differ between "warning" and "encouraging" messages (odds ratio 1.04, 95% CI 0.92, 1.18).

CONCLUSIONS

Informational postcards led to a 24.4% absolute increase in adherence at 70 days among Veterans with pacemakers and ICDs who were non-adherent to RM.

A cost-effectiveness analysis of remote monitoring after pacemaker implantation for bradycardia in Japan

BACKGROUND

Although remote monitoring (RM) after pacemaker implantation is common, its cost-effectiveness has not been fully investigated. Therefore, we assessed the cost-effectiveness of RM compared with conventional follow-up (CFU) in Japanese patients with pacemakers.

METHODS

A Markov model was constructed to analyze costs and quality-adjusted life years after pacemaker implantation. The target population was Japanese patients implanted with a dual-chamber pacemaker for bradycardia. Transition probabilities (e.g. atrial fibrillation, stroke, and device trouble) were obtained from literature and expert sources. Additionally, stroke risk was determined according to anticoagulation and CHADS2 scores. We used a 10-year horizon with sensitivity analyses for significant variables.

RESULTS

Compared to CFU, RM was more effective; however, it was also more expensive. When the range of the Japanese willingness-to-pay threshold was considered to be ¥5,000,000, RM was at least cost-neutral relative to the CFU in all elderly patients with pacemakers for bradycardia. The cost-effectiveness of RM relative to CFU could be higher for patients with high CHADS2 scores, especially in patients with a CHADS2 score ≥ 3. Scenario analyses changing the interval between visits to an in-office evaluation in the CFU also demonstrated the same conclusions. In particular, when the interval between office visits was 1 year for the CFU, the RM could be more cost-effective.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that RM can be a cost-effective option for Japanese patients, especially those with high CHADS2 scores and long-term intervals between office visits.

Long-Term Remote vs. Conventional Monitoring of Pacemakers: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Remote monitoring (RM) is the standard of care for patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs), particularly pacemakers. However, the long-term outcomes of RM versus conventional monitoring (CM) of pacemakers and its effectiveness in reducing in-office (IO) visits for device reprogramming require elucidation. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the RM and CM of pacemakers over a long-term follow-up.

RECENT FINDINGS

We systematically searched the PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing RM and CM of pacemakers with at least 12 months of follow-up. Binary endpoints were pooled with risk ratios (RRs), whereas continuous outcomes were computed using mean differences (MDs) or standardized MDs (SMDs). Heterogeneity was assessed using I2 statistics. Among the eight included RCTs, 2159 (48.9%) of 4063 patients underwent RM. Follow-up periods ranged from 12 to 24 months. There were no significant between-group differences in all-cause mortality (RR = 1.19; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.90-1.57; p = 0.22; I2 = 0%), stroke (RR = 0.90; 95% CI, 0.43-1.91; p = 0.79; I2 = 23%), hospitalizations for cardiovascular and/or device-related adverse events (RR = 0.95; 95% CI, 0.75-1.21; p = 0.70; I2 = 0%), and quality of life (SMD = - 0.06; 95% CI, - 0.22 to 0.10; p = 0.473; I2 = 0%). RM was associated with fewer IO visits/patient/year (MD = 0.98; 95% CI, - 1.64 to - 0.33; p = 0.08; I2 = 98%) and higher rates of atrial tachyarrhythmia (ATA) detection (RR = 1.22; 95% CI, 1.01-1.48; p = 0.04; I2 = 0%) than was CM. This meta-analysis suggests that RM of pacemakers leads to higher rates of ATA detection and fewer IO visits/patient/year, without compromising patient safety.

Heart failure management guided by remote multiparameter monitoring: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Several implant-based remote monitoring strategies are currently tested to optimize heart failure (HF) management by anticipating clinical decompensation and preventing hospitalization. Among these solutions, the modern implantable cardioverter-defibrillator and cardiac resynchronization therapy devices have been equipped with sensors allowing continuous monitoring of multiple preclinical markers of worsening HF, including factors of autonomic adaptation, patient activity, and intrathoracic impedance.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to assess whether implant-based multiparameter remote monitoring strategy for guided HF management improves clinical outcomes when compared to standard clinical care.

METHODS

A systematic literature research for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing multiparameter-guided HF management versus standard of care was performed on PubMed, Embase, and CENTRAL databases. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) and associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using the Poisson regression model with random study effects. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause death and HF hospitalization events, whereas secondary endpoints included the individual components of the primary outcome.

RESULTS

Our meta-analysis included 6 RCTs, amounting to a total of 4869 patients with an average follow-up time of 18 months. Compared with standard clinical management, the multiparameter-guided strategy reduced the risk of the primary composite outcome (IRR 0.83, 95%CI 0.71-0.99), driven by statistically significant effect on both HF hospitalization events (IRR 0.75, 95%CI 0.61-0.93) and all-cause death (IRR 0.80, 95%CI 0.66-0.96).

CONCLUSION

Implant-based multiparameter remote monitoring strategy for guided HF management is associated with significant benefit on clinical outcomes compared to standard clinical care, providing a benefit on both hospitalization events and all-cause death.

An overview of the effect of telehealth on mortality: A systematic review of meta-analyses

INTRODUCTION

Telehealth is recognised as a viable way of providing health care over distance, and an effective way to increase access for individuals with transport difficulties or those living in rural and remote areas. While telehealth has many positives for patients, clinicians and the health system, it is important that changes in the delivery of health care (e.g. in-person to telehealth) do not result in inferior or unsafe care. In this review, we collate existing meta-analyses of mortality rates to provide a holistic view of the current evidence regarding telehealth safety.

METHODS

In November 2020, a search of Pretty Darn Quick Evidence portal was conducted in order to locate systematic reviews published between 2010 and 2019, examining and meta-analysing the effect of telehealth interventions on mortality compared to usual care.

RESULTS

This review summarises evidence from 24 meta-analyses. Five overarching medical disciplines were represented (cardiovascular, neurology, pulmonary, obstetrics and intensive care). Overall, telehealth did not increase mortality rates.

DISCUSSION

The evidence from this review can be used by decision makers, in conjunction with other disease-specific and health economic evidences, to support and guide telehealth implementation plans.

The clinical effectiveness of telehealth: A systematic review of meta-analyses from 2010 to 2019

INTRODUCTION

To promote telehealth implementation and uptake, it is important to assess overall clinical effectiveness to ensure any changes will not adversely affect patient outcomes. The last systematic literature review examining telehealth effectiveness was conducted in 2010. Given the increasing use of telehealth and technological developments in the field, a more contemporary review has been carried out. The aim of this review was to synthesise recent evidence associated with the clinical effectiveness of telehealth services.

METHODS

A systematic search of 'Pretty Darn Quick'-Evidence portal was carried out in November 2020 for systematic reviews on telehealth, where the primary outcome measure reported was clinical effectiveness. Due to the volume of telehealth articles, only systematic reviews with meta-analyses published between 2010 and 2019 were included in the analysis.

RESULTS

We found 38 meta-analyses, covering 10 medical disciplines: cardiovascular disease (n = 3), dermatology (n = 1), endocrinology (n = 13), neurology (n = 4), nephrology (n = 2), obstetrics (n = 1), ophthalmology (n = 1), psychiatry and psychology (n = 7), pulmonary (n = 4) and multidisciplinary care (n = 2). The evidence showed that for all disciplines, telehealth across a range of modalities was as effective, if not more, than usual care.

DISCUSSION

This review demonstrates that telehealth can be equivalent or more clinically effective when compared to usual care. However, the available evidence is very discipline specific, which highlights the need for more clinical effectiveness studies involving telehealth across a wider spectrum of clinical health services. The findings from this review support the view that in the right context, telehealth will not compromise the effectiveness of clinical care when compared with conventional forms of health service delivery.

2023 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS expert consensus statement on practical management of the remote device clinic

Remote monitoring is beneficial for the management of patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices by impacting morbidity and mortality. With increasing numbers of patients using remote monitoring, keeping up with higher volume of remote monitoring transmissions creates challenges for device clinic staff. This international multidisciplinary document is intended to guide cardiac electrophysiologists, allied professionals, and hospital administrators in managing remote monitoring clinics. This includes guidance for remote monitoring clinic staffing, appropriate clinic workflows, patient education, and alert management. This expert consensus statement also addresses other topics such as communication of transmission results, use of third-party resources, manufacturer responsibilities, and programming concerns. The goal is to provide evidence-based recommendations impacting all aspects of remote monitoring services. Gaps in current knowledge and guidance for future research directions are also identified.

Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) Auto Threshold algorithms Evaluation for Conduction System Pacing: The LATECS pilot Trial

BACKGROUND

Automated threshold measurements (ATM) and output adaptation improved safety and follow-up of cardiac implantable devices (CIED) in the last years. These algorithms were validated for conventional cardiac pacing; however, they were not suitable for permanent His Pacing. Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) is an emerging technique to obtain physiologic cardiac stimulation; we tried to assess if ATM could be applied to this setting.

METHODS

Consecutive patients receiving ATM-capable CIED and LBBAP in our hospital were enrolled in this prospective, observational trial; they were evaluated 3 months after implant, comparing pacing thresholds manually assessed and obtained via ATM. Subsequent remote follow-up was carried on when available.

RESULTS

Forty-five patients were enrolled. ATM for LBBAP lead provided consistent results in all the patients and was therefore activated; mean value of manually obtained LBBAP capture threshold was 0.66 ± 0.19 V versus ATM of 0.64 ± 0.19 V. TOST analysis showed equivalence of the two measures (p = .66). At subsequent follow-up (mean follow up 7.7 ± 3.2 months), ATM was effective in assessing pacing thresholds and no clinical adverse event was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

ATM algorithms proved equivalent to manual testing in determining capture threshold and were reliably employed in patients receiving LBBAP CIED.

The digital journey: 25 years of digital development in electrophysiology from an Europace perspective

AIMS

Over the past 25 years there has been a substantial development in the field of digital electrophysiology (EP) and in parallel a substantial increase in publications on digital cardiology.In this celebratory paper, we provide an overview of the digital field by highlighting publications from the field focusing on the EP Europace journal.

RESULTS

In this journey across the past quarter of a century we follow the development of digital tools commonly used in the clinic spanning from the initiation of digital clinics through the early days of telemonitoring, to wearables, mobile applications, and the use of fully virtual clinics. We then provide a chronicle of the field of artificial intelligence, a regulatory perspective, and at the end of our journey provide a future outlook for digital EP.

CONCLUSION

Over the past 25 years Europace has published a substantial number of papers on digital EP, with a marked expansion in digital publications in recent years.

Remote monitoring of cardiac implantable electronic devices and disease management

This reviews the transition of remote monitoring of patients with cardiac electronic implantable devices from curiosity to standard of care. This has been delivered by technology evolution from patient-activated remote interrogations at appointed intervals to continuous monitoring that automatically flags clinically actionable information to the clinic for review. This model has facilitated follow-up and received professional society recommendations. Additionally, continuous monitoring has provided a new level of granularity of diagnostic data enabling extension of patient management from device to disease management. This ushers in an era of digital medicine with wider applications in cardiovascular medicine.

Inter-American Society of Cardiology (CIFACAH-ELECTROSIAC) and Latin-American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS): multidisciplinary review on the appropriate use of implantable cardiodefibrillator in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction

BACKGROUND

Our main objective was to present a multidisciplinary review on the epidemiology of sudden cardiac death (SCD) and the tools that could be used to identify malignant ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) and to perform risk stratification. In addition, indications and contraindications for the use of implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) in general and in special populations including the elderly and patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) are also given.

METHODS

An expert group from the Inter American Society of Cardiology (IASC), through their HF Council (CIFACAH) and Electrocardiology Council (ElectroSIAC), together with the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS), reviewed and discussed the literature regarding the appropriate use of an ICD in people with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFpEF). Indications and contraindications for the use of ICD are presented in this multidisciplinary review.

RESULTS

Numerous clinical studies have demonstrated the usefulness of ICD in both primary and secondary prevention of SCD in HFpEF. There are currently precise indications and contraindications for the use of these devices.

CONCLUSIONS

In some Latin American countries, a low rate of implantation is correlated with low incomes, but this is not the case for all Latin America. Determinants of the low rates of ICD implantation in many Latin American countries are still a matter of research. VA remains one of the most common causes of cardiovascular death associated with HFrEF and different tools are available for stratifying the risk of SCD in this population.

2023 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS Expert Consensus Statement on Practical Management of the Remote Device Clinic

Remote monitoring is beneficial for the management of patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices by impacting morbidity and mortality. With increasing numbers of patients using remote monitoring, keeping up with higher volume of remote monitoring transmissions creates challenges for device clinic staff. This international multidisciplinary document is intended to guide cardiac electrophysiologists, allied professionals, and hospital administrators in managing remote monitoring clinics. This includes guidance for remote monitoring clinic staffing, appropriate clinic workflows, patient education, and alert management. This expert consensus statement also addresses other topics such as communication of transmission results, use of third-party resources, manufacturer responsibilities, and programming concerns. The goal is to provide evidence-based recommendations impacting all aspects of remote monitoring services. Gaps in current knowledge and guidance for future research directions are also identified.

2023 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS Expert Consensus Statement on Practical Management of the Remote Device Clinic

Remote monitoring is beneficial for the management of patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices by impacting morbidity and mortality. With increasing numbers of patients using remote monitoring, keeping up with higher volume of remote monitoring transmissions creates challenges for device clinic staff. This international multidisciplinary document is intended to guide cardiac electrophysiologists, allied professionals, and hospital administrators in managing remote monitoring clinics. This includes guidance for remote monitoring clinic staffing, appropriate clinic workflows, patient education, and alert management. This expert consensus statement also addresses other topics such as communication of transmission results, use of third-party resources, manufacturer responsibilities, and programming concerns. The goal is to provide evidence-based recommendations impacting all aspects of remote monitoring services. Gaps in current knowledge and guidance for future research directions are also identified.

The Italian Society of Cardiology and Working Group on Telecardiology and Informatics 2023 updated position paper on telemedicine and artificial intelligence in cardiovascular disease

In 2015, the Italian Society of Cardiology and its Working Group on Telemedicine and Informatics issued a position paper on Telecardiology, resuming the most eminent evidence supporting the use of information and communication technology in principal areas of cardiovascular care, ranked by level of evidence. More than 5 years later and after the global shock inflicted by the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, an update on the topic is warranted. Recent evidence and studies on principal areas of cardiovascular disease will be therefore reported and discussed, with particular focus on telemedicine for cardiovascular care in the COVID-19 context. Novel perspectives and opportunities disclosed by artificial intelligence and its applications in cardiovascular disease will also be discussed. Finally, modalities by which machine learning have realized remote patient monitoring and long-term care in recent years, mainly filtering critical clinical data requiring selective hospital admission, will be provided.

Impact of Remote Cardiac Monitoring on Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Global Cardiovascular Carbon Footprint Project

Background

Remote monitoring (RM) of patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) is efficient and requires fewer resources than conventional monitoring. However, the impact of RM on the carbon footprint (CF) is not known.

Objectives

The authors sought to evaluate the reduction in cost and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions with RM as compared to conventional monitoring of CIEDs and its relevance to CF.

Methods

Data were obtained from a third-party RM provider on 32,811 patients from 67 device clinics across the United States. Distance from home address to the device clinic for patients on RM was calculated. Savings in total distance traveled over 2 years was calculated using frequency of follow-up required for the device type. National fuel efficiency data and carbon emission data were obtained from the Bureau of Transportation Statistics and U.S. Environmental Protective Agency, respectively. The average gas price during the study period was obtained from U.S. Energy Information Administration.

Results

In the study population, RM resulted in a total saving of 31.7 million travel miles at $3.45 million and reduction of 12,518 metric ton of GHG from gasoline. There was a reduction of 14.2-million-page printouts, $3 million in cost, and 78 tons of GHG. Improvement in workforce efficiency with RM resulted in savings of $3.7 million. There was a net saving of $10.15 million and 12,596 tons of GHG emissions.

Conclusions

RM of patients with a CIED resulted in significant reductions in GHG emissions. Efforts to actively promoting RM can result in significant reduction in CF.

Economic evaluation and costs of remote patient monitoring for cardiovascular disease in the United States: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Remote patient monitoring (RPM) has emerged as a viable and valuable care delivery method to improve chronic disease management. In light of the high prevalence and substantial economic burden of cardiovascular disease (CVD), this systematic review examines the cost and cost-effectiveness of using RPM to manage CVD in the United States.

METHODS

We systematically searched databases to identify potentially relevant research. Findings were synthesized for cost and cost-effectiveness by economic study type with consideration of study perspective, intervention, clinical outcome, and time horizon. The methodological quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Checklist for Economic Evaluations.

RESULTS

Thirteen articles with fourteen studies published between 2011 and 2021 were included in the final review. Studies from the provider perspective with a narrow scope of cost components identified higher costs and similar effectiveness for the RPM group relative to the usual care group. However, studies from payer and healthcare sector perspectives indicate better clinical effectiveness of RPM relative to usual care, with two cost-utility analysis studies suggesting that RPM relative to usual care is a cost-effective tool for CVD management even at the conservative $50,000 per Quality-Adjusted Life-Year threshold. Additionally, all model-based studies revealed that RPM is cost-effective in the long run.

CONCLUSIONS

Full economic evaluations identified RPM as a potentially cost-effective tool, particularly for long-term CVD management. In addition to the current literature, rigorous economic analysis with a broader perspective is needed in evaluating the value and economic sustainability of RPM.

Remote Patient Monitoring: What Have We Learned and Where Are We Going?

Purpose of Review

Remote monitoring (RM) of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) is an important part of patient follow-up. The increasing number of patients with CIEDs and the recent pandemic pose several challenges for already limited device clinic resources. This review focuses on recent evolutions in RM and identifies future needs to improve RM.

Recent Findings

RM has been associated with multiple clinical benefits, including improved survival, early detection of actionable events, reduction in inappropriate shocks, longer battery lives, and more efficient healthcare utilization. The survival benefit was driven by studies using alert-based continuous RM with daily transmissions and fast reaction times. Patients report a high satisfaction rate without significant differences in quality of life between RM and in-office follow-up.The increasing workload, due to the increasing number of CIEDs implanted with daily remote transmissions, results in several challenges for the future of RM. RM requires appropriate reimbursement for RM device clinics to optimize patient/staff ratios, including sufficient non-clinical and administrative support. Universal alert programming and data processing may minimize inter-manufacturer differences, improve the signal-to-noise ratio, and allow the development of standard operating protocols and workflows. In the future, programming by remote control and true remote programming may further improve remote CIED management, patient quality of life, and device clinic workflows.

Summary

RM should be considered standard of care in management of patients with CIEDs. The clinical benefits of RM can be maximized by an alert-based continuous RM model. Adapted healthcare policies are required to keep RM manageable for the future.

Reduction in long-term mortality using remote device monitoring in a large real-world population of patients with implantable defibrillators

AIMS

Remote monitoring (RM) for implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) is advocated for the potential of early detection of disease progression and device dysfunction. While studies have examined the effect of RM on clinical outcomes in carefully selected populations of heart failure patients implanted with ICDs from a single vendor, there is a paucity of data in real-world patients. We aimed to assess the long-term effect of RM in a representative ICD population using real-world data.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This is an observational retrospective longitudinal study of 1004 patients implanted with an ICD or cardiac resynchronization therapy device (CRT-D) from all device vendors between 2010 and 2021. Patients started on RM (N = 403) within 90 days following de novo device implantation and yearly in-office visits were compared with patients with only bi-yearly in-office follow-up (non-RM, N = 601). In a propensity score matched cohort of 430 patients (mean age 61.4 ± 14.3 years, 26.7% female), all-cause mortality at 4-year was 12.6% in the RM and 27.7% in the non-RM group [hazard ratio (HR) 0.52, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.32-0.82; P = 0.005]. No difference in inappropriate ICD-therapy (HR 1.90, 95% CI 0.86-4.21; P = 0.122) was observed. The risk of appropriate ICD-therapy (HR 1.71, 95% CI 1.07-2.74; P = 0.026) was higher in the RM group.

CONCLUSION

Remote monitoring was associated with a reduction in long-term all-cause and cardiac mortality compared with traditional office visits in a real-world ICD population.

Alert-driven vs scheduled remote monitoring of implantable cardiac defibrillators: A cost-consequence analysis from the TRUST trial

BACKGROUND

Alert-driven remote patient monitoring (RPM) or fully virtual care without routine evaluations may reduce clinic workload and promote more efficient resource allocation, principally by diminishing nonactionable patient encounters.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to conduct a cost-consequence analysis to compare 3 postimplant implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) follow-up strategies: (1) in-person evaluation (IPE) only; (2) RPM-conventional (hybrid of IPE and RPM); and (3) RPM-alert (alert-based ICD follow-up).

METHODS

We constructed a decision-analytic Markov model to estimate the costs and benefits of the 3 strategies over a 2-year time horizon from the perspective of the US Medicare payer. Aggregate and patient-level data from the TRUST (Lumos-T Safely RedUceS RouTine Office Device Follow-up) randomized clinical trial informed clinical effectiveness model inputs. TRUST randomized 1339 patients 2:1 to conventional RPM or IPE alone, and found that RPM was safe and reduced the number of nonactionable encounters. Cost data were obtained from the published literature. The primary outcome was incremental cost.

RESULTS

Mean cumulative follow-up costs per patient were $12,688 in the IPE group, $12,001 in the RPM-conventional group, and $11,011 in the RPM-alert group. Compared to the IPE group, both the RPM-conventional and RPM-alert groups were associated with lower incremental costs of -$687 (95% confidence interval [CI] -$2138 to +$638) and -$1,677 (95% CI -$3134 to -$304), respectively. Therefore, the RPM-alert strategy was most cost-effective, with an estimated cost-savings in 99% of simulations.

CONCLUSIONS

Alert-driven RPM was economically attractive and, if patient outcomes and safety are comparable to those of conventional RPM, may be the preferred strategy for ICD follow-up.

Real-World Disparities in Remote Follow-Up of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices and Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Single-Center Experience

Background Remote monitoring (RM) of cardiac implantable electronic devices has been shown to improve cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. To date, no studies have investigated disparities in use and delivery of RM. This study was performed to investigate if racial and socioeconomic disparities are present in cardiac implantable electronic device RM. Methods and Results This was a retrospective observational cohort study at a single tertiary care center in the United States. Patients who received a newly implanted cardiac implantable electronic device or device upgrade between January 2017 and December 2020 were included. Patients were classified as RM positive (RM+) when they underwent at least ≥2 remote interrogations per year during follow-up. Of all eligible patients, 2520 patients were included, and 34% were women. The mean follow-up was 25 months. Mean age was 71±14 years. Pacemakers constituted 66% of implanted devices, whereas 26% were implantable cardioverter-defibrillators, and 8% were cardiac resynchronization therapy with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators. Most patients (83%) were of European American ancestry. During follow-up, 66% of patients were classified as RM+. Patients who were younger, European American, college-educated, lived in a county with higher median household income, and were active on the hospital's patient portals were more frequently RM+. In an adjusted regression model, RM+ remained associated with the use of the online patient portal (odds ratio [OR], 2.889 [95% CI, 2.387-3.497]), presence of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (OR, 1.489 [95% CI, 1.207-1.835]), advanced college degree (OR, 1.244 [95% CI, 1.014-1.527]), and lastly with European American ancestry (P<0.05). During the years of the COVID-19 pandemic, the number of RM+ patients increased, whereas the association with ancestry and ethnicity decreased. Conclusions Despite being offered to all patients at implantation, significant disparities were present in cardiovascular implantable electronic device RM in this cohort. Disparities were partly reversed during COVID-19. Further studies are needed to examine health center- and patient-specific factors to overcome these barriers, and to facilitate equal opportunities to participate in RM.

Remote Monitoring of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices: What is the Evidence?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review offers an overview of the evidence in diagnostic and therapeutic applications of remote monitoring implantable devices.

RECENT FINDINGS

Remote monitoring of cardiac implantable devices has become more and more popular in recent years as healthcare is moving towards a more patient centralized system. For heart failure patients with an ICD or pacemaker, there is controversial evidence regarding improvements in the clinical outcome, e.g., reduction of hospitalization rates or overall mortality. New developments as hemodynamic remote monitoring via measurement of the pulmonary artery pressure are promising technical achievements showing encouraging results. In cardiac remote monitoring of syncope and arrhythmias, implantable loop recorder plays an important role in diagnostic algorithms. Although there is controversial evidence according to remote monitoring of implantable devices, its use is rapidly expanding, giving healthcare providers the opportunity to react promptly to worsening of their patients. Adequate evaluation of the data created by remote monitoring systems remains an unsolved challenge of contemporary healthcare services.

A Prospective, Multicentre Randomised Controlled Trial Comparing Catheter Ablation Versus Antiarrhythmic Drugs in Patients With Structural Heart Disease Related Ventricular Tachycardia: The CAAD-VT Trial Protocol

IMPORTANCE

Randomised trials have shown that catheter ablation (CA) is superior to medical therapy for ventricular tachycardia (VT) largely in patients with ischaemic heart disease. Whether this translates to patients with all forms and stages of structural heart disease (SHD-e.g., non-ischaemic heart disease) is unclear. This trial will help clarify whether catheter ablation offers superior outcomes compared to medical therapy for VT in all patients with SHD.

OBJECTIVE

To determine in patients with SHD and spontaneous or inducible VT, if catheter ablation is more efficacious than medical therapy in control of VT during follow-up.

DESIGN

Randomised controlled trial including 162 patients, with an allocation ratio of 1:1, stratified by left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and geographical region of site, with a median follow-up of 18-months and a minimum follow-up of 1 year.

SETTING

Multicentre study performed in centres across Australia.

PARTICIPANTS

Structural heart disease patients with sustained VT or inducible VT (n=162).

INTERVENTION

Early treatment, within 30 days of randomisation, with catheter ablation (intervention) or initial treatment with antiarrhythmic drugs only (control).

MAIN OUTCOMES, MEASURES, AND RESULTS

Primary endpoint will be a composite of recurrent VT, VT storm (≥3 VT episodes in 24 hrs or incessant VT), or death. Secondary outcomes will include each of the individual primary endpoints, VT burden (number of VT episodes in the 6 months preceding intervention compared to the 6 months after intervention), cardiovascular hospitalisation, mortality (including all-cause mortality, cardiac death, and non-cardiac death) and LVEF (assessed by transthoracic echocardiography from baseline to 6-, 12-, 24- and 36-months post intervention).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The Catheter Ablation versus Anti-arrhythmic Drugs for Ventricular Tachycardia (CAAD-VT) trial will help determine whether catheter ablation is superior to antiarrhythmic drug therapy alone, in patients with SHD-related VT.

TRIAL REGISTRY

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) TRIAL REGISTRATION ID: ACTRN12620000045910 TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=377617&isReview=true.

The Feasibility, Effectiveness and Acceptance of Virtual Visits as Compared to In-Person Visits among Clinical Electrophysiology Patients during the COVID-19 Pandemic

The feasibility and effectiveness of virtual visits (VVs) for cardiac electrophysiology patients are still unknown. We aimed to assess the feasibility and effectiveness of VVs as compared to in-person visits, and to describe patient experience with virtual care in clinical electrophysiology. We prospectively enrolled patients scheduled to receive a clinical electrophysiology evaluation, dividing them in two groups: a VV group and an in-person visit group. Outcomes of interest were: (1) improvement in symptoms after the index visit, (2) disappearance of remote monitoring (RM) alerts at follow-up, (3) necessity of urgent hospitalization and (4) patient satisfaction measured by the Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire-18 (PSQ-18). This study included 162 patients in the VV group and 185 in the in-office visit group. As compared to in-person visits, VVs resulted in a similar reduction in RM alerts (51.5% vs. 43.2%, p-value 0.527) and in symptomatic patient rates (73.6% vs. 56.9%, p-value 0.073) at follow-up, without differences in urgent hospitalization rates (p-value 0.849). Patient satisfaction with VVs was higher than with in-person evaluation (p-value < 0.012). VVs proved to be as feasible and as effective as in-person visits, with high patient satisfaction. A hybrid model of care including VVs and in-person visits may become the new standard of care after the COVID-19 pandemic is over.

The patient perspective on remote monitoring of implantable cardiac devices

Aims

Remote monitoring for patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) is well established in clinical routine and recommended by current guidelines. Nevertheless, data regarding patients' perceptions are limited. Therefore, this study aims to analyze the patient perspectives on the remote monitoring of cardiac devices in Germany.

Methods and results

Patients with CIEDs and remote monitoring of all current manufacturers from three German centers were asked to participate. The questionnaire consisted of 37 questions regarding the patients' individual use and perspectives on remote monitoring. Survey participation was anonymous and on a voluntary basis. A total of 617 patients (71.6% men) participated. Most patients reported feeling well informed (69.3%) and reported having unchanged or improved coping (98.8%) since the start of remote monitoring. At least 39.7% of patients experienced technical problems regarding the transmitter, whereas most patients (60.3%) reported that they never noted technical issues. Older patients had significantly less interest than younger patients in using their own smartphones for data transfer (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

Patients with remote follow-up of CIED reported that they felt well informed about the remote monitoring approach. Remote monitoring can support coping with their disease. With remote monitoring, patients experienced a prolongation of intervals of in-person follow-up visits, and especially younger patients would appreciate smartphone-based data transfer of their CIEDs.

Remote monitoring of pacemakers and defibrillators: Effective and safe in Brazil?

Background

The remote monitoring (RM) of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) has become a common method of in-home monitoring and follow-up in high-income countries given its effectiveness, safety, convenience, and the possibility of early intervention. However, in Brazil, RM is still underutilized.

Objectives

This observational study aims to demonstrate our experience of using RM in Brazil and the predictive factors of RM of CIED follow-up in Brazil.

Methods

This was a prospective cohort study of patients with a CIED. Event rates are reported and clinical responses to those findings and outcomes based on the detection of RM. A logistic regression model was performed to identify predictors of more events, with P < .05 for statistical significance.

Results

This study evaluated consecutive 119 patients: 30.2% with pacemakers, 42.8% with implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, 22.7% with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) with defibrillator, and 3.3% with CRT with pacemaker. Events were detected in 63.9% of the cases in 29.5 ± 23 months of follow-up. The outcomes found were that 44.5% needed elective evaluation in medical treatment and 23.5% needed immediate evaluation in therapy. Logistic regression analysis showed that the groups with CRT or CRT with defibrillator (75.0%), reduced ejection fraction (76.5%), and New York Heart Association functional class ≥II (75.0%) had the highest RM event rates.

Conclusions

RM proved to be effective and safe in the follow-up of patients with CIEDs in Brazil, allowing early interventions and facilitating therapeutic management.

Remote monitoring in patients with heart failure with cardiac implantable electronic devices: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Remote monitoring (RM) of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) is now the standard of care, but whether the demonstrated benefits of RM translate into improvements in heart failure (HF) management is controversial. This systematic review addresses the role of RM in patients with HF with a CIED.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A systematic search of the literature for randomised clinical trials in patients with HF and a CIED assessing efficacy/effectiveness of RM was performed using MEDLINE, PubMed and Embase. Meta-analysis was performed on the effects of RM of CIEDs in patients with HF on mortality and readmissions. Effects on implantable cardiac defibrillator (ICD) therapy, healthcare costs and clinic presentations were also assessed.607 articles were identified and refined to 10 studies with a total of 6579 patients. Implementation of RM was not uniform with substantial variation in methodology across the studies. There was no reduction in mortality or hospital readmission rates, while ICD therapy findings were inconsistent. There was a reduction in patient-associated healthcare costs and reduction in healthcare presentations.

CONCLUSION

RM for patients with CIEDs and HF was not uniformly performed. As currently implemented, RM does not provide a benefit on overall mortality or the key metric of HF readmission. It does provide a reduction in healthcare costs and healthcare presentations.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42019129270.

Smartphone-based cardiac implantable electronic device remote monitoring: improved compliance and connectivity

Aims

Remote monitoring (RM) is the standard of care for follow up of patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices. The aim of this study was to compare smartphone-based RM (SM-RM) using patient applications (myMerlinPulse™ app) with traditional bedside monitor RM (BM-RM).

Methods and results

The retrospective study included de-identified US patients who received either SM-RM or BM-RM capable of implantable cardioverter defibrillators or cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators (Abbott, USA). Patients in SM-RM and BM-RM groups were propensity-score matched on age and gender, device type, implant year, and month. Compliance with RM was quantified as the proportion of patients enrolling in the RM system (Merlin.net™) and transmitting data at least once. Connectivity was measured by the median number of days between consecutive transmissions per patient. Of the initial 9714 patients with SM-RM and 26 679 patients with BM-RM, 9397 patients from each group were matched. Remote monitoring compliance was higher in SM-RM; significantly more patients with SM-RM were enrolled in RM compared with BM-RM (94.4 vs. 85.0%, P < 0.001), similar number of patients in the SM-RM group paired their device (95.1 vs. 95.0%, P = 0.77), but more SM-RM patients transmitted at least once (98.1 vs. 94.3%, P < 0.001). Connectivity was significantly higher in the SM-RM, with patients transmitting data every 1.2 (1.1, 1.7) vs. every 1.7 (1.5, 2.0) days with BM-RM (P < 0.001) and remained better over time. Significantly more SM-RM patients utilized patient-initiated transmissions compared with BM-RM (55.6 vs. 28.1%, P < 0.001).

Conclusion

In this large real-world study, patients with SM-RM demonstrated improved compliance and connectivity compared with BM-RM.

Economic evaluation of remote monitoring of patients with an implantable cardiac defibrillator (REMOTE-CIED study)

INTRODUCTION

Remote patient monitoring (RPM) of heart failure patients has the potential to reduce healthcare resource use and costs, but current evidence has been inconclusive. This study aims assess the impact of RPM of heart failure patients with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator on medical resource use, direct medical costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and travel time of patients, and to estimate its commercial headroom in the Netherlands and Germany.

METHODS

Data from the REMOTE-CIED randomized controlled trial were used to calculate differences in length of hospital stay, outpatient clinic visits, telephone consults, emergency room visits, and travel time between patients on in-clinic follow-up and RPM in the Netherlands, Germany, and France. Incremental cardiac-related healthcare costs and QALYs were calculated and used to calculate the commercial headroom of RPM in the Netherlands and Germany. The impact of imputation, parameter, and case-mix uncertainty on these outcomes was explored using probabilistic analysis.

RESULTS

Length of hospitalization, number of unscheduled admissions, and number of outpatient visits were lower in the remote monitoring group in all three countries. Number of hospital admissions was higher, and number of calls was lower in the Netherlands and Germany but not in France. Costs were lower in both the Netherlands (-€1041, 95% confidence interval (CI): -€3308, €1005) and Germany (-€2865, 95% CI: -€7619, €1105), while incremental effectiveness differed: -0.003 (95% CI: -0.114, 0.107) QALY in the Netherlands and +0.086 (95% CI: -0.083, 0.256) in Germany. Commercial headroom was estimated at €881 (95% CI: -€5430, €7208) in the Netherlands and €5005 (95% CI: -€1339, €11,960) in Germany.

DISCUSSION

RPM was found to result in reduced medical resource use and travel time. Whether it is cost saving or cost effective strongly depends on the costs of remote monitoring.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER AND TRIAL REGISTER

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01691586.

Efficacy of ICD/CRT-D Remote Monitoring in Patients With HFrEF: a Bayesian Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To evaluate remote monitoring using implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) or cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator (CRT-D) devices as an adjunctive tool to the traditional care of patients with heart failure (HF).

RECENT FINDINGS

We included 11 trials encompassing 5965 patients. Absolute risk difference (ARD) with 95% credible interval (CrI) was estimated. Pooled (posterior) risk difference was computed using Bayesian hierarchical methods. The ARD for mortality was centered at - 0.01 (95% CrI: - 0.03; 0.01, Tau: 0.02), with an 82% probability of ARD of ICD/CRT-D remote monitoring with respect to control being less than 0. The ARD for cardiovascular mortality was centered at - 0.03 (95% CrI: - 0.11; 0.05, Tau: 0.10), with an 84% probability of ARD of ICD/CRT-D remote monitoring with respect to control being less than 0. ICD/CRT-D remote monitoring in patients with HF is associated with a higher probability of reduced all-cause and cardiovascular mortality compared with standard care alone.

The Gallant™ system heart rhythm management device: making a connection

Implantable cardiac defibrillators have revolutionized the way we prevent sudden cardiac death via arrhythmias. The addition of cardiac resynchronization pacing to defibrillators has broadened that treatment to include patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction. As with all technology, new devices and platforms expand the capabilities and interface with patients across the world. This review discusses the evolution from the initial modalities and methods of communication of implantable devices up to the most recent advances in implantable defibrillators and their integration into patient lives and clinical practice. This review is focused on the integration of Bluetooth communication into modern healthcare with the Gallant™ family of devices, the first branded launch by Abbott Laboratories.

Nachsorge und MRT-Untersuchungen bei Patienten mit implantierten kardialen Aggregaten

In den 2021 publizierten ESC-Leitlinien wird im Rahmen des Kapitels über die Aggregatnachsorge insbesondere die Bedeutung der Telemetrie hervorgehoben. Durch eine telemetrische Nachsorge sind wesentlich seltener Präsenznachsorgen notwendig bei gleichwertiger oder sogar verbesserter Sicherheit. Eine telemetrische Überwachung sollte daher bei allen Patienten mit CIED erwogen werden.

Die Leitlinien beschreiben detailliert die Möglichkeiten und Einschränkungen von MRT-Untersuchungen bei Patienten mit CIED. Programmierempfehlungen für die verschiedenen Hersteller werden dargestellt. Unter Einhaltung entsprechender Sicherheitsstandards kann eine MRT auch ohne größeres Risiko bei Patienten mit nicht MRT-kompatiblen Systemen erfolgen.

Cost of remote patient monitoring for cardiovascular disease: a systematic review protocol

OBJECTIVE

This review aims to evaluate the costs and cost-effectiveness of remote patient monitoring for cardiovascular disease in the United States.

INTRODUCTION

Cardiovascular disease is a leading public health concern in the United States, resulting in a substantial economic burden. Remote patient monitoring has emerged as a viable and valuable care delivery method to improve cardiovascular disease management at home. However, there is limited systematic research of the cost and cost-effectiveness of using remote patient monitoring to manage the disease.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

This review will consider all studies evaluating the cost of remote patient monitoring for cardiovascular disease management in the United States. The population of interest includes all individuals with various types of chronic cardiovascular disease in the United States.

METHODS

The search strategy will locate both published and unpublished studies. Systematic searches will be completed in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database, and the Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry. Two reviewers will independently screen titles and abstracts, followed by a full-text review against the inclusion criteria. Disagreements will be resolved through discussion between all study members. The JBI checklist for economic evaluations will be utilized to evaluate the methodological quality of studies. Data will be extracted using a modified version of the JBI data extraction form for economic evaluations. Reviewers will summarize studies and cost-related metrics. The Dominance Ranking Matrix will be used to synthesize full economic evaluation.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER

PROSPERO CRD42021270621.

Wearables, telemedicine, and artificial intelligence in arrhythmias and heart failure: Proceedings of the European Society of Cardiology: Cardiovascular Round Table

Digital technology is now an integral part of medicine. Tools for detecting, screening, diagnosis, and monitoring health-related parameters have improved patient care and enabled individuals to identify issues leading to better management of their own health. Wearable technologies have integrated sensors and can measure physical activity, heart rate and rhythm, and glucose and electrolytes. For individuals at risk, wearables or other devices may be useful for early detection of atrial fibrillation or sub-clinical states of cardiovascular disease, disease management of cardiovascular diseases such as hypertension and heart failure, and lifestyle modification. Health data are available from a multitude of sources, namely clinical, laboratory and imaging data, genetic profiles, wearables, implantable devices, patient-generated measurements, and social and environmental data. Artificial intelligence is needed to efficiently extract value from this constantly increasing volume and variety of data and to help in its interpretation. Indeed, it is not the acquisition of digital information, but rather the smart handling and analysis that is challenging. There are multiple stakeholder groups involved in the development and effective implementation of digital tools. While the needs of these groups may vary, they also have many commonalities, including the following: a desire for data privacy and security; the need for understandable, trustworthy, and transparent systems; standardized processes for regulatory and reimbursement assessments; and better ways of rapidly assessing value.

2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" replaces the "2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" and the "2017 ACC/AHA/HFSA Focused Update of the 2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure." The 2022 guideline is intended to provide patient-centric recommendations for clinicians to prevent, diagnose, and manage patients with heart failure.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2020 to December 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant clinical trials and research studies, published through September 2021, were also considered. This guideline was harmonized with other American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines published through December 2021. Structure: Heart failure remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. The 2022 heart failure guideline provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence for the treatment of these patients. The recommendations present an evidence-based approach to managing patients with heart failure, with the intent to improve quality of care and align with patients' interests. Many recommendations from the earlier heart failure guidelines have been updated with new evidence, and new recommendations have been created when supported by published data. Value statements are provided for certain treatments with high-quality published economic analyses.

Should We Check It? Assessing Interrogation of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices in the Emergency Department-The CHECK-ED Study: Implications for Service Planning and Care Delivery

BACKGROUND

Requests from the emergency department (ED) for cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) checks constitute a large workload for cardiac electrophysiology services. We sought to determine the yield of, and clinical characteristics associated with, clinically relevant (remarkable) issues from ED CIED checks.

METHODS

Consecutive CIED checks from our ED over a 12-month period were studied. A remarkable issue (RI) was defined as arrhythmia relating to the presentation or device/lead issue requiring reprogramming or intervention. The association between the presenting complaint and an RI was assessed using regression analysis. Multivariable regression model was used to identify pre-specified patient-level characteristics that were predictive of a RI.

RESULTS

A RI was found in 28% (n=98) of 354 ED CIED checks for 306 patients (76±16 yrs 59% male). Most patients had no RI (n=224 73%). One third of checks occurred after-hours and these had a higher yield of RIs than those during routine clinic hours (35% vs 23% p=0.018). Presenting with a perceived ICD shock was predictive of a RI (odds ratio [OR] 6.0 95% CI=1.8-20.0). Syncope/presyncope was five-fold less likely to be predictive of a RI (OR 0.19 95% CI=0.13-0.28) despite being the most common indication for CIED check (51% n=180 checks). Only history of AF was predictive of RI while advancing age was predictive of not finding a RI.

CONCLUSION

Almost three-quarters of ED CIED checks did not yield any RI. Patient-reported ICD shock and history of AF were predictive of RI, while syncope/presyncope was not. New models of care especially during after-hours, may help to reduce the burden on cardiac electrophysiology services and health care costs.

A mobile app for improving the compliance with remote management of patients with cardiac implantable devices: a multicenter evaluation in clinical practice

Background

The remote device management (RM) is recommended for patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). RM underutilization is frequently driven by the lack of correct system activation. The MyLATITUDE Patient App (Boston Scientific) has been developed to encourage patient compliance with RM by providing information on communicator setup, troubleshooting, and connection status of the communicator.

Methods

At 14 centers, patients with CIEDs were invited to download and install the App on a mobile device. After 3 months, patients were asked to complete an ad hoc questionnaire to evaluate their experience.

Results

The App was proposed to 242 consecutive patients: 81 before RM activation, and 161 during follow-up. The App was successfully installed by 177 (73%) patients. The time required for activation of the communicator and the need for additional support were similar between patients who followed the indications provided by the App and those who underwent standard in-clinic training. During follow-up, notifications of lack of connection were received by 20 (11%) patients and missed transmission by 22 (12%). The median time from notification to resolution was 2 days. After 3 months, 175 (99%) communicators of the 177 patients who installed the App were in “Monitored” status versus 113 (94%) of 120 patients without the App installed (p=0.033). The use of the app made 84% of patients feel reassured.

Conclusions

The App was well accepted by CIED patients and offered support for communicator management and installation. Its use enabled patients to remain connected with greater continuity during follow-up.

2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure

AIM

The "2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" replaces the "2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" and the "2017 ACC/AHA/HFSA Focused Update of the 2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure." The 2022 guideline is intended to provide patient-centric recommendations for clinicians to prevent, diagnose, and manage patients with heart failure.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2020 to December 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant clinical trials and research studies, published through September 2021, were also considered. This guideline was harmonized with other American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines published through December 2021.

STRUCTURE

Heart failure remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. The 2022 heart failure guideline provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence for the treatment of these patients. The recommendations present an evidence-based approach to managing patients with heart failure, with the intent to improve quality of care and align with patients' interests. Many recommendations from the earlier heart failure guidelines have been updated with new evidence, and new recommendations have been created when supported by published data. Value statements are provided for certain treatments with high-quality published economic analyses.