The use of remote monitoring of cardiac implantable devices during the COVID-19 pandemic: an EHRA physician survey.

It is unclear to what extent the COVID-19 pandemic has influenced the use of remote monitoring (RM) of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). The present physician-based European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) survey aimed to assess the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on RM of CIEDs among EHRA members and how it changed the current practice. The survey comprised 27 questions focusing on RM use before and during the pandemic. Questions focused on the impact of COVID-19 on the frequency of in-office visits, data filtering, reasons for initiating in-person visits, underutilization of RM during COVID-19, and RM reimbursement. A total of 160 participants from 28 countries completed the survey. Compared to the pre-pandemic period, there was a significant increase in the use of RM in patients with pacemakers (PMs) and implantable loop recorders (ILRs) during the COVID-19 pandemic (PM 24.2 vs. 39.9%, P = 0.002; ILRs 61.5 vs. 73.5%, P = 0.028), while there was a trend towards higher utilization of RM for cardiac resynchronization therapy-pacemaker (CRT-P) devices during the pandemic (44.5 vs. 55%, P = 0.063). The use of RM with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) and CRT-defibrillator (CRT-D) did not significantly change during the pandemic (ICD 65.2 vs. 69.6%, P = 0.408; CRT-D 65.2 vs. 68.8%, P = 0.513). The frequency of in-office visits was significantly lower during the pandemic (P < 0.001). Nearly two-thirds of participants (57 out of 87 respondents), established new RM connections for CIEDs implanted before the pandemic with 33.3% (n = 29) delivering RM transmitters to the patient's home address, and the remaining 32.1% (n = 28) activating RM connections during an in-office visit. The results of this survey suggest that the crisis caused by COVID-19 has led to a significant increase in the use of RM of CIEDs.

Impact of COVID-19 on the incidence of cardiac arrhythmias in implantable cardioverter defibrillator recipients followed by remote monitoring.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been a fast-growing worldwide pandemic. AIMS: We aimed to investigate the incidence of cardiac arrhythmias among a large French cohort of implantable cardioverter defibrillator recipients over the first 5 months of 2020. METHODS: Five thousand nine hundred and fifty-four implantable cardioverter defibrillator recipients were followed by remote monitoring during the COVID-19 period (from 01 January to 31 May 2020). Data were obtained from automated remote follow-up of implantable cardioverter defibrillators utilizing the Implicity® platform. For all patients, the type of arrhythmia (atrial fibrillation, ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation), the number of ventricular arrhythmia episodes and the type of implantable cardioverter defibrillator-delivered therapy were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 472 (7.9%) patients presented 4917 ventricular arrhythmia events. An increase in ventricular arrhythmia incidence was observed after the first COVID-19 case in France, and especially during weeks #10 and #11, at the time of major governmental measures, with an increase in the incidence of antitachycardia pacing delivered therapy. During the 11 weeks before the lockdown order, the curve of the percentage of live-stream television coverage of COVID-19 information matched the ventricular arrhythmia incidence. During the lockdown, the incidence of ventricular arrhythmia decreased significantly compared with baseline (0.05±0.7 vs. 0.09±1.2 episodes per patient per week, respectively; P<0.001). Importantly, no correlation was observed between ventricular arrhythmia incidence and the curve of COVID-19 incidence. No changes were observed regarding atrial fibrillation/atrial tachycardia episodes over time. CONCLUSIONS: An increase in ventricular arrhythmia incidence was observed in the 2 weeks before the lockdown order, at the time of major governmental measures. Ventricular arrhythmia incidence decreased dramatically during the lockdown.

[Out-of-hospital sudden cardiac arrest and COVID-19 pandemic]. / Arrêt cardiaque extrahospitalier et pandémie de la COVID-19.

Since the appearance of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, the direct mortality related to COVID-19 infections has been monitored worldwide, with a daily count of the number of deaths due to COVID-19. Several measures have been undertaken in the societal and professional field, and the healthcare systems have been reorganized to limit the virus spread, and to cope with the surge of hospital admissions for COVID-19. Questions have been raised regarding the indirect effect of the pandemic, with uncertainties regarding the impact of delays in non-COVID diseases management, due to lockdown, postponement of non-urgent medical consultations and interventions, and decrease in screening. Sudden cardiac death could have been impacted by all those changes, and is generally a good surrogate of public health. In the current article, we review the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the epidemiology and outcome of sudden cardiac death.

Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest during the COVID-19 pandemic in Paris, France: a population-based, observational study.

BACKGROUND: Although mortality due to COVID-19 is, for the most part, robustly tracked, its indirect effect at the population level through lockdown, lifestyle changes, and reorganisation of health-care systems has not been evaluated. We aimed to assess the incidence and outcomes of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) in an urban region during the pandemic, compared with non-pandemic periods. METHODS: We did a population-based, observational study using data for non-traumatic OHCA (N=30 768), systematically collected since May 15, 2011, in Paris and its suburbs, France, using the Paris Fire Brigade database, together with in-hospital data. We evaluated OHCA incidence and outcomes over a 6-week period during the pandemic in adult inhabitants of the study area. FINDINGS: Comparing the 521 OHCAs of the pandemic period (March 16 to April 26, 2020) to the mean of the 3052 total of the same weeks in the non-pandemic period (weeks 12-17, 2012-19), the maximum weekly OHCA incidence increased from 13·42 (95% CI 12·77-14·07) to 26·64 (25·72-27·53) per million inhabitants (p<0·0001), before returning to normal in the final weeks of the pandemic period. Although patient demographics did not change substantially during the pandemic compared with the non-pandemic period (mean age 69·7 years [SD 17] vs 68·5 [18], 334 males [64·4%] vs 1826 [59·9%]), there was a higher rate of OHCA at home (460 [90·2%] vs 2336 [76·8%]; p<0·0001), less bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (239 [47·8%] vs 1165 [63·9%]; p<0·0001) and shockable rhythm (46 [9·2%] vs 472 [19·1%]; p<0·0001), and longer delays to intervention (median 10·4 min [IQR 8·4-13·8] vs 9·4 min [7·9-12·6]; p<0·0001). The proportion of patients who had an OHCA and were admitted alive decreased from 22·8% to 12·8% (p<0·0001) in the pandemic period. After adjustment for potential confounders, the pandemic period remained significantly associated with lower survival rate at hospital admission (odds ratio 0·36, 95% CI 0·24-0·52; p<0·0001). COVID-19 infection, confirmed or suspected, accounted for approximately a third of the increase in OHCA incidence during the pandemic. INTERPRETATION: A transient two-times increase in OHCA incidence, coupled with a reduction in survival, was observed during the specified time period of the pandemic when compared with the equivalent time period in previous years with no pandemic. Although this result might be partly related to COVID-19 infections, indirect effects associated with lockdown and adjustment of health-care services to the pandemic are probable. Therefore, these factors should be taken into account when considering mortality data and public health strategies. FUNDING: The French National Institute of Health and Medical Research (INSERM).