A prospective comparison of remote monitoring systems in implantable cardiac defibrillators: potential effects of frequency of transmissions.

PURPOSE: Currently, cardiac implantable electronic devices allow remote monitoring (RM) based on periodic (Boston Latitude [LAT], Medtronic Carelink [MCL], St. Jude Merlin [SJM]) or daily transmissions (Biotronik Home Monitoring [BHM]). The aim of this study was to compare all the current RM systems in normal practice and investigate the effect of periodicity of RM transmissions on early detection of clinical and device-related events. METHODS: Two hundred eleven ICD patients (mean age 69±11 years, 158 males), were remotely followed up for 1 year (61 with BHM, 49 with LAT, 65 with MCL, 36 with SJM). Remote follow-ups were configured quarterly, except for the BHM (daily transmissions). RESULTS: The event-free rates were 49% with BHM, 57% with LAT, 57% with MCL, and 58 % with SJM (long-rank, p=0.23). BHM generated 304 (interquartile range, 184­342) transmissions per patient in a year, LAT 9 (8­11), MCL 7 (5­10), and SJM 8 (7­14) (p<0.000001). Eighty actionable events occurred at 1 year follow-up, 69 (86%) with RM systems: BHM was associated with a higher cumulative rate of actionable events. At a multivariate analysis, daily transmissions were independently associated with an increased probability of event detection as compared to periodic transmission systems. The chance of event detection is reduced by 20% (p=0.036) for a 1-month increase of the between-transmission interval (27 % for actionable events, p=0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Although all RM systems effectively detected major events, daily transmission was associated with a higher probability of early event detection.

Early detection of adverse events with daily remote monitoring versus quarterly standard follow-up program in patients with CRT-D.

BACKGROUND: A relative high rate of clinical and device-related adverse events (AE) is generally reported in patients with implantable defibrillators for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT-D). Aim of this study was to compare a daily remote monitoring (RM) to a standard program of in-office visits. METHODS AND RESULTS: We retrospectively analyzed RM database and hospital files of 99 CRT-D consecutive patients who were visited in the out-patient clinic every 3-4 months; thirty-three patients were in addition controlled remotely with RM (RM group). Kaplan-Meier curves of clinical or device-related AE-free rates were obtained. During a median follow-up of 7 months, clinical AEs were: ventricular and atrial arrhythmias in 14 and 11 patients, low CRT pacing in nine, heart failure, strokes, or death in 15. Device-related AEs were: insufficient pacing/sensing performances in nine patients, lead dislodgement in five. As comparing the RM group with the remaining patients, Kaplan-Meier curves of clinical AEs diverged to significantly different rates: 23.8% (confidence interval [CI] 0.1%-47.5%) in the RM group and 48.7% (21.6-75.7%) in the remaining patients (P = 0.00002), with a hazard ratio of 0.14 (CI 0.06-0.37). Nondivergent Kaplan-Meier curves were obtained for device-related AE-free rates. CONCLUSION: CRT-D patients followed with quarterly in-office visits without a daily RM system had an 86% higher risk of delayed detection of clinical AEs, during a median follow-up of 7 months.