Reduction in new cardiac electronic device implantations in Catalonia during COVID-19

The clinical use of remote parameter testing during cardiac implantable electronic devices implantation procedures: a single center, randomized, open-label, non-inferiority trial

Background

A novel non-contact system for remote parameter testing and reprogramming offers an alternative method for assessing device parameters during cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) implantation without the need for physical contact with the manufacturer's clinical service technician. The safety and feasibility of using this system in CIEDs implantation procedures remains to be determined.

Objective

Evaluate the safety and feasibility of remote parameter testing in CIEDs implantation procedures.

Methods

A single center, randomized, open-label, non-inferiority trial (ChiCTR2200057587) was conducted to compare the two approaches for interrogating CIEDs during implantation procedures: routine interrogation performed by on-site technicians or remote interrogation performed by technicians using the 5G-Cloud Technology Platform. Patients aged ≥18 years and elected to receive CIEDs were eligible for inclusion. The primary endpoint was the completion rate of the parameter test. Safety and efficiency were evaluated in all randomly assigned participants.

Results

A total of 480 patients were finally enrolled and were randomly assigned to routine group (n = 240) or remote group (n = 240). The primary endpoint was achieved by 100% in both groups (P = 0.0060 for noninferiority). The parameters of sensing, threshold, and impedance regarding the right atrium, right ventricle, and left ventricle had no statistical significance between the two groups (P > 0.05). Procedure time, parameter testing time, and both duration and dose of x-ray irradiation were not significantly different between the two groups (P > 0.05). Shut-open door frequency was significantly higher in the routine group than the remote group [6.00 (4.00, 8.00) vs. 0, P < 0.0001]. Notably, no clinical or technical complications were observed in the remote group.

Conclusions

Remote parameter testing is safe and feasible across various devices implantation procedures. The utilization of remote parameter testing and reprogramming could represent an innovative approach to improve healthcare accessibility and unlock the full potential of secondary centers in managing CIEDs.

The Registration Identification

ChiCTR2200057587.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on implantation of cardiac implantable electronic devices and remote monitoring activations

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Remote monitoring (RM) of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) is considered more reliable, efficient, and safer than conventional in-person follow-up. However, the implementation of RM is still suboptimal. This study aimed to analyze the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the rates of CIED implants and RM activations in Spain.

METHODS

The COVID-19 RM Spain Registry was used to analyze the monthly number of all CIED implantations and RM activations from January 2018 to December 2021. A descriptive analysis was performed using aggregated data from the five major CIED manufacturers.

RESULTS

A total of 205 345 CIEDs were recorded. The number of implants decreased sharply (48.2%) during the pandemic lockdown (March-June 2020) but gradually increased thereafter, compensating for the previous reduction. However, pacemakers and implantable cardiac defibrillators (ICD) showed an aggregate loss of 7% and 3%, respectively, from the annual average during 2020-2021. In contrast, cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators (CRT-D) increased by 17%, and pacemakers (CRT-P) by 4.5% over the 2-year period. The percentage of RM activations increased from 24.5% in 2018 to 49.0% in 2021, with a sharp increase during the lockdown. The RM activation rates consistently increased during the lockdown for all devices: pacemakers (14.4% vs 37.2%; P <.001); ICD (75.6% vs 94.2%; P <.001); CRT-D/CRT-P (68.6-44.2% vs 81.6-61%; P <.001), and implantable loop recorders (50.2% vs 68.7%; P <.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The significant decline in implants during the lockdown gradually recovered, except for pacemakers and ICD. However, the COVID-19 pandemic boosted RM for all CIEDs in Spain.

A global analysis of implants and replacements of pacemakers and cardioverter-defibrillators before, during, and after the COVID-19 pandemic in Italy

At the beginning of the COVID-19 emergency, non-urgent surgical procedures had to be deferred, but also emergencies were reduced. To assess the global trend of pacemaker (PM) and implantable cardiac-defibrillator (ICD) procedures performed in Italy before, during, and after the first COVID-19 emergency, all the Italian hospital discharge records related to PM/ICD procedures performed between 2012 and 2021, sent to the National Institute of Health, were reviewed. Compared to 2019, in 2020, there was a reduction of first PM implants (52,216 to 43,962, -16%; p < 0.01), but not replacements (16,591 to 17,331, + 4%; p = 0.16). In particular, in April 2020, there was a drop of first implants (- 53,4% vs the average value of April 2018 and April 2019; p < 0.01), while the reduction of replacements was less evident (-32.6%; p = NS). In 2021, PM procedures increased to values similar to the pre-pandemic period. A reduction of ICD procedures was observed in 2020 (22,355, -7% toward 2019), mainly in April 2020 (- 46% vs April 2018/April 2019; p = 0.03). In 2021, the rate of ICD procedures increased (+ 14% toward 2020). A non-significant reduction of "urgent" procedures (complete atrioventricular block for PM and ventricular fibrillation for ICD), even in April 2020, was observed. In 2020, there was a reduction of first PM implants and ICDs, offset by increased activity in 2021. No decrease in PM replacements was observed, and the drop in "urgent" PM and ICD procedures was not statistically significant.

Spanish implantable cardioverter-defibrillator registry. 19th official report of Heart Rhythm Association of the Spanish Society of Cardiology (2022)

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

This article presents data on implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implants in Spain in 2022.

METHODS

The data were collected from implantation centers, which voluntarily completed a data collection sheet during the implantation process, either manually or through a web page.

RESULTS

In 2022, 170 hospitals participated in the registry. A total of 7693 forms were received compared with the 7970 reported by Eucomed (European Confederation of Medical Suppliers Associations), representing 96.5% of the devices. The total rate of registered implants was 162/million inhabitants (168 according to Eucomed), showing a slight increase compared with previous years. Disparities persisted among autonomous communities and Spain continued to have the lowest implantation rate among countries participating in Eucomed.

CONCLUSIONS

The data from the registry for 2022 reflect the complete recovery of activity after the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. Despite a slight improvement, there was no significant change in our position in Europe or in the substantial differences among autonomous communities.

Length of hospital stay for elective electrophysiological procedures: a survey from the European Heart Rhythm Association

AIMS

Electrophysiological (EP) operations that have traditionally involved long hospital lengths of stay (LOS) are now being undertaken as day case procedures. The coronavirus disease-19 pandemic served as an impetus for many centres to shorten LOS for EP procedures. This survey explores LOS for elective EP procedures in the modern era.

METHODS AND RESULTS

An online survey consisting of 27 multiple-choice questions was completed by 245 respondents from 35 countries. With respect to de novo cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantations, day case procedures were reported for 79.5% of implantable loop recorders, 13.3% of pacemakers (PMs), 10.4% of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs), and 10.2% of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices. With respect to CIED generator replacements, day case procedures were reported for 61.7% of PMs, 49.2% of ICDs, and 48.2% of CRT devices. With regard to ablations, day case procedures were reported for 5.7% of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablations, 10.7% of left-sided ablations, and 17.5% of right-sided ablations. A LOS ≥ 2 days for CIED implantation was reported for 47.7% of PM, 54.5% of ICDs, and 56.9% of CRT devices and for 54.5% of AF ablations, 42.2% of right-sided ablations, and 46.1% of left-sided ablations. Reimbursement (43-56%) and bed availability (20-47%) were reported to have no consistent impact on the organization of elective procedures.

CONCLUSION

There is a wide variation in the LOS for elective EP procedures. The LOS for some procedures appears disproportionate to their complexity. Neither reimbursement nor bed availability consistently influenced LOS.

Clinical and financial outcomes of hospitalizations for cardiac device infection during the COVID-19 pandemic in the US

BACKGROUND

Cardiac device infection (CDI) can occur in up to 2.2% of patients after device placement, with mortality rates exceeding 15%. Although device removal is standard management, the COVID-19 pandemic has been associated with resource diversion and decreased patient presentation for cardiovascular disease. We ascertained the association of the COVID-19 pandemic with outcomes and resource utilization after admission for CDI.

METHODS

The 2016-2020 National Inpatient Sample was used to retrospectively study all adult admissions for CDI. Patients admitted between March and December, 2020 were classified as the pandemic cohort, with the rest pre-pandemic. The primary outcome was major adverse events (MAE), with secondary outcomes of overall length of stay (LOS), post-device removal LOS, time to device replacement, and hospitalization costs. MAE was a combination of in-hospital mortality and select complications. Multivariable regression models were developed to determine the relationship between the pandemic and the aforementioned outcomes.

RESULTS

Of an estimated 190,160 patients, 14.3% comprised the pandemic cohort; 2.4% of these patients were COVID-19 positive. The pandemic cohort was older, less commonly female, and had higher rates of congestive heart failure. After adjustment, the pandemic was not associated with altered odds of MAE, device removal, or subsequent device replacement. The pandemic was, however, associated with decreased adjusted overall LOS (β -0.38 days) and days to device replacement (β -0.83 days). The pandemic was likewise associated with $2,000 increased adjusted hospitalization costs.

CONCLUSION

The pandemic did not have a significant impact on clinical outcomes in patients admitted for CDI, despite higher hospitalization costs and decreased length of stay.

Impact of Nationwide COVID-19 Lockdowns on the Implantation Rate of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices

AIM

The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a significant decrease in the number of hospital admissions for severe emergent cardiovascular diseases during lockdowns worldwide. This study aimed to determine the impact of both the first and the second Danish nationwide lockdown on the implantation rate of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs).

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed the number of CIED implantations performed in Denmark and stratified them into 3-week intervals.

RESULTS

The total number of de novo CIED implantations decreased during the first lockdown by 15.5% and during the second by 5.1%. Comparing each 3-week interval using rate ratios, a significant decrease in the daily rates of the total number of de novo and replacement CIEDs (0.82, 95% CI [0.70, 0.96]), de novo CIEDs only (0.82, 95% CI [0.69, 0.98]), and non-acute pacemaker implantations (0.80, 95% CI [0.63, 0.99]) was observed during the first interval of the first lockdown. During the second lockdown (third interval), a significant decrease was seen in the daily rates of de novo CIEDs (0.73, 95% CI [0.55, 0.97]), and of pacemakers in total during both the second (0.78, 95% CI [0.62, 0.97]) and the third (0.60, 95% CI [0.42, 0.85]) intervals. Additionally, the daily rates of acute pacemaker implantation decreased during the second interval (0.47, 95% CI [0.27, 0.79]) and of non-acute implantation during the third interval (0.57, 95% CI [0.38, 0.84]). A significant increase was observed in the number of replacement procedures during the first interval of the second lockdown (1.70, 95% CI [1.04, 2.85]).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study found only modest changes in CIED implantations in Denmark during two national lockdowns.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cardiac implantable electronic device implantation in China: Insights from 2 years of changing pandemic conditions

Background

A substantial reduction in the number of cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation was reported in the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. None of the studies have yet explored changes in CIED implantation during the following pandemic.

Objective

To explore changes in CIED implantation during the COVID-19 pandemic from 2020 to 2021.

Methods

From 2019 to 2021, 177,263 patients undergone CIED implantation from 1,227 hospitals in China were included in the analysis. Generalized linear models measured the differences in CIED implantation in different periods. The relationship between changes in CIED implantation and COVID-19 cases was assessed by simple linear regression models.

Results

Compared with the pre-COVID-19 period, the monthly CIED implantation decreased by 17.67% (95% CI: 16.62-18.72%, p < 0.001) in 2020. In 2021, the monthly number of CIED implantation increased by 15.60% (95% CI: 14.34-16.85%, p < 0.001) compared with 2020. For every 10-fold increase in the number of COVID-19 cases, the monthly number of pacemaker implantation decreased by 429 in 2021, while it decreased by 676 in 2020. The proportion of CIED implantation in secondary medical centers increased from 52.84% in 2019 to 56.77% in 2021 (p < 0.001). For every 10-fold increase in regional accumulated COVID-19 cases, the proportion of CIED implantation in secondary centers increased by 6.43% (95% CI: 0.47-12.39%, p = 0.036).

Conclusion

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the number of CIED implantation is diminishing in China. Improving the ability of secondary medical centers to undertake more operations may be a critical way to relieve the strain on healthcare resources during the epidemic.

Spanish implantable cardioverter-defibrillator registry. 18th official report of the Heart Rhythm Association of the Spanish Society of Cardiology (2021)

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

This article presents the data corresponding to implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantations in Spain in 2021.

METHODS

The data were drawn from implanting centers, which voluntarily completed a data collection sheet during the procedure.

RESULTS

In 2021, 7496 implant data sheets were received, compared with 7743 reported by Eucomed (European Confederation of Medical Suppliers Associations), indicating that data were collected from 96.8% of the devices implanted in Spain. Data completion ranged from 99.9% for "name of implanting hospital" to 8.9% for "implanting hospital". In 2021, 199 hospitals participated in the registry, exceeding the figures of previous years, with around 170 participating hospitals. The total rate of registered implants was 158/million inhabitants (163 according to Eucomed), making 2021 the year with the highest activity. However, the registry continues to show significant differences among the various autonomous communities and the lowest implantation rate of all the European countries participating in Eucomed.

CONCLUSIONS

The Spanish implantable cardioverter-defibrillator registry for 2021 recorded an increase in the number of ICD implantations, reflecting the recovery of hospital activity after the initial impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. Although the total number of implants has increased in Spain, figures are still much lower than the European Union average, with differences persisting among Spanish autonomous communities.

The influence of the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic on the implantation rates of cardiac implantable electronic devices in Germany: changes between 2020 Q1-Q3 and 2019 Q1-Q3

Aim

During the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, hospital admissions for several medical and surgical conditions have declined. Few data are available with respect to elective cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) implantation. The aim of the present study was to determine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the monthly CIED implantation rates in Germany.

Methods and Results

The monthly rates of CIED implantation for the 2019 pre- and 2020 pandemic periods were retrieved from the “Institute für das Entgeltsystem im Krankenhaus” (InEK) using OPS codes to identify pacemakers (PMs), implantable cardioverter/defibrillators (ICDs) and cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) systems. Compared with 2019, the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with an overall decline of CIED implantation rates of -2.6%, reaching -22,9% in April 2020. Stratified by device type, the patterns of implantation were similar between PMs and ICDs, with maximal declines of -24.3% and -23.2% in April, respectively. Thereafter, the implantation rates gradually increased before stabilizing to rates similar to those observed in 2019. CRT implantation rates also declined in the early pandemic wave, but the overall 2020 rates increased by +4.3% likely driven by an increase of +16.5% (June to September). All observed percentage differences of monthly device type related implantation rates demonstrated a statistical significance.

Conclusions

The COVID-19 pandemic had a significant impact on the implantation of CIEDs in Germany. A differential pattern of resource utilization was observed with a catch-up effect for PMs and ICDs. The implantation rates of CRT also declined, but they increased rapidly and remained higher than those of 2019.

Implantation of cardiac electronic devices in active COVID-19 patients: Results from an international survey

BACKGROUND

Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation rates as well as the clinical and procedural characteristics and outcomes in patients with known active coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are unknown.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to gather information regarding CIED procedures during active COVID-19, performed with personal protective equipment, based on an international survey.

METHODS

Fifty-three centers from 13 countries across 4 continents provided information on 166 patients with known active COVID-19 who underwent a CIED procedure.

RESULTS

The CIED procedure rate in 133,655 hospitalized COVID-19 patients ranged from 0 to 16.2 per 1000 patients (P <.001). Most devices were implanted due to high-degree/complete atrioventricular block (112 [67.5%]) or sick sinus syndrome (31 [18.7%]). Of the 166 patients in the study survey, the 30-day complication rate was 13.9% and the 180-day mortality rate was 9.6%. One patient had a fatal outcome as a direct result of the procedure. Differences in patient and procedural characteristics and outcomes were found between Europe and North America. An older population (76.6 vs 66 years; P <.001) with a nonsignificant higher complication rate (16.5% vs 7.7%; P = .2) was observed in Europe vs North America, whereas higher rates of critically ill patients (33.3% vs 3.3%; P <.001) and mortality (26.9% vs 5%; P = .002) were observed in North America vs Europe.

CONCLUSION

CIED procedure rates during known active COVID-19 disease varied greatly, from 0 to 16.2 per 1000 hospitalized COVID-19 patients worldwide. Patients with active COVID-19 infection who underwent CIED implantation had high complication and mortality rates. Operators should take these risks into consideration before proceeding with CIED implantation in active COVID-19 patients.

Spanish Implantable Cardioverter-defibrillator Registry. 17th Official Report of the Heart Rhythm Association of the Spanish Society of Cardiology (2020)

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

We present the data corresponding to implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implants in Spain in 2020.

METHODS

The data in this registry were drawn from implantation centers, which voluntarily completed a data collection sheet.

RESULTS

In 2020, 7056 implant sheets were received compared with 7106 reported by Eucomed (European Confederation of Medical Suppliers Associations), indicating that data were collected from 99% of the devices implanted in Spain. Completion of the implant sheet ranged from 99.8% for the field "name of the implanting hospital" to 2.6% for the variable "referral hospital". A total of 173 hospitals performed ICD implants and participated in the registry, which is a similar figure to that in 2019 (n=172). The total rate of registered implants was 149/million inhabitants (150 according to Eucomed), revealing a slight reduction in implants in Spain in 2020 as a result of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. This reduction was uneven among the autonomous communities.

CONCLUSIONS

The Spanish Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Registry for 2020 shows an improvement in the rate of implants reported and a reduction in the number of ICD implants, which likely reflects the decrease in hospital activity not related to the treatment of COVID-19 infection. Similar to previous years, the total number of implants in Spain is still much lower than the average for the European Union, with an increase in the differences between Spanish autonomous communities.

Electrophysiology and Interventional Cardiology Procedure Volumes During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has imposed an unprecedented health care crisis across the globe. Health care efforts across the world have been diverted to tackling the pandemic since early 2020. Hospitals and health care systems have undertaken major restructuring in an effort to deliver health care to an increasing number of patients affected by COVID-19. Although great focus has been placed on treating those individuals suffering from COVID-19, clinicians must simultaneously balance caring for patients who are not actively infected. In anticipation of an exponential increase in COVID-19 cases, health care systems developed strategies to channel available resources to meet the rapidly rising demands of COVID-19. This change was noticed significantly in the field of invasive cardiology as well. Many cardiac catheterization and electrophysiology (EP) laboratories canceled elective procedures to limit the burden on hospital resources and preserve personal protective equipment (PPE). Major societies published guidance statements delineating patient selection for procedures during the exponential phase of the pandemic growth. Patient care was triaged and those waiting for elective procedures were managed with expectant care or noninvasive approaches to preserve hospital resources and personnel. In the current article, we review the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and its response to the volume of interventional cardiology (IC) and EP procedures across the world.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on cardiac electronic device implantations in Northwestern Greece

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic seems to have a significant impact on cardiovascular-related hospital visits and admissions. The effect of the ongoing pandemic on the cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) procedures is less well studied. We recorded and compared the rates of de novo implantations and replacements of CIEDs performed by two experienced implanters in our referral center between years 2019 and 2020, as well as the periods of lockdowns in 2020 to the corresponding periods of the previous year. Our data indicate a significant decrease in CIEDs de novo implantations during the COVID-19 pandemic (year 2020) even though the replacements were increased. Both de novo implantations and replacements were markedly declined during the first lockdown period while no significant change was observed during the second lockdown period. However, urgent pacemaker implantations did not change significantly between 2020 and 2019 during these periods. Of note, in our study the total number of de novo pacemaker and CRT implantations did not change significantly between 2019 and 2020 while ICD and ILR procedures dropped significantly.