Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 6 de 6
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
País/Região como assunto
Tipo de documento
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Circulation ; 122(23): 2359-67, 2010 Dec 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21098452

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Outcome data for patients receiving implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) and cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator (CRT-D) devices treated outside of clinical trials are lacking. No clinical trial has evaluated mortality after device implantation or after shock therapy in large numbers of patients with implanted devices that regularly transmit device data over a network. METHODS AND RESULTS: Survival status in patients implanted with ICD and CRT devices across the United States from a single manufacturer was assessed. Outcomes were compared between patients followed in device clinic settings and those who regularly transmit remote data collected from the device an average of 4 times monthly. Shock delivery and electrogram analysis could be ascertained from patients followed on the network, enabling survival after ICD shock to be evaluated. One- and 5-year survival rates in 185,778 patients after ICD implantation were 92% and 68% and were 88% and 54% for CRT-D device recipients. In 8228 patients implanted with CRT-only devices, survival was 82% and 48% at 1 and 5 years, respectively. For the 69,556 ICD and CRT-D patients receiving remote follow-up on the network, 1- and 5-year survival rates were higher compared with those in the 116,222 patients who received device follow-up in device clinics only (50% reduction; P<0.0001). There were no differences between patients followed on or off the remote network for the characteristics of age, gender, implanted device year or type, and economic or educational status. Shock therapy was associated with subsequent mortality risk for both ICD and CRT-D recipients. CONCLUSIONS: Survival after ICD and CRT-D implantation in patients treated in naturalistic practice compares favorably with survival rates observed in clinical trials. Remote follow-up of device data is associated with excellent survival, but arrhythmias that result in device therapy in this population are associated with a higher mortality risk compared with patients who do not require shock therapy.


Assuntos
Altitude , Terapia de Ressincronização Cardíaca/mortalidade , Desfibriladores Implantáveis , Tecnologia de Sensoriamento Remoto/mortalidade , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Terapia de Ressincronização Cardíaca/métodos , Terapia de Ressincronização Cardíaca/tendências , Convulsoterapia/mortalidade , Convulsoterapia/tendências , Desfibriladores Implantáveis/tendências , Feminino , Seguimentos , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Prospectivos , Tecnologia de Sensoriamento Remoto/métodos , Tecnologia de Sensoriamento Remoto/tendências , Taxa de Sobrevida/tendências , Fatores de Tempo , Resultado do Tratamento
3.
J Interv Card Electrophysiol ; 46(2): 129-36, 2016 Aug.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26860839

RESUMO

PURPOSE: Guidelines advocate remote monitoring (RM) in patients with a cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED). However, it is not known when RM should be initiated. We hypothesized that prompt initiation of RM (within 91 days of implant) is associated with improved survival compared to delayed initiation. METHODS: This retrospective, national, observational cohort study evaluated patients receiving new implants of market-released St. Jude Medical™ pacemakers (PM), implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD), and cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices. Patients were assigned to one of two groups: an "RM Prompt" group, in which RM was initiated within 91 days of implant; and an "RM Delayed" group, in which RM was initiated >91 days but ≤365 days of implant. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. RESULTS: The cohort included 106,027 patients followed for a mean of 2.6 ± 0.9 years. Overall, 47,014 (44 %) patients had a PM, 31,889 (30 %) patients had an ICD, 24,005 (23 %) patients had a CRT-D, and 3119 (3 %) patients had a CRT-P. Remote monitoring was initiated promptly (median 4 weeks [IQR 2, 8 weeks]) in 66,070 (62 %) patients; in the other 39,957 (38 %) patients, RM initiation was delayed (median 24 weeks [IQR 18, 34 weeks]). In comparison to delayed initiation, prompt initiation of RM was associated with a lower mortality rate (4023 vs. 4679 per 100,000 patient-years, p < 0.001) and greater adjusted survival (HR 1.18 [95 % CI 1.13-1.22], p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our data, for the first time, show improved survival in patients enrolled promptly into RM following CIED implantation. This advantage was observed across all CIED device types.


Assuntos
Desfibriladores Implantáveis/estatística & dados numéricos , Insuficiência Cardíaca/mortalidade , Insuficiência Cardíaca/prevenção & controle , Marca-Passo Artificial/estatística & dados numéricos , Tecnologia de Sensoriamento Remoto/estatística & dados numéricos , Tempo para o Tratamento/estatística & dados numéricos , Idoso , Feminino , Insuficiência Cardíaca/diagnóstico , Humanos , Masculino , Seleção de Pacientes , Prevalência , Tecnologia de Sensoriamento Remoto/mortalidade , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores de Risco , Taxa de Sobrevida , Telemedicina/estatística & dados numéricos , Resultado do Tratamento , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Listas de Espera/mortalidade
4.
J Am Coll Cardiol ; 65(24): 2601-2610, 2015 Jun 23.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25983008

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Remote monitoring (RM) technology embedded within cardiac rhythm devices permits continuous monitoring, which may result in improved patient outcomes. OBJECTIVES: This study used "big data" to assess whether RM is associated with improved survival and whether this is influenced by the type of cardiac device and/or its degree of use. METHODS: We studied 269,471 consecutive U.S. patients implanted between 2008 and 2011 with pacemakers (PMs), implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs), or cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) with pacing capability (CRT-P)/defibrillation capability (CRT-D) with wireless RM. We analyzed weekly use and all-cause survival for each device type by the percentage of time in RM (%TRM) stratified by age. Socioeconomic influences on %TRM were assessed using 8 census variables from 2012. RESULTS: The group had implanted PMs (n = 115,076; 43%), ICDs (n = 85,014; 32%), CRT-D (n = 61,475; 23%), and CRT-P (n = 7,906; 3%). When considered together, 127,706 patients (47%) used RM, of whom 67,920 (53%) had ≥75%TRM (high %TRM) and 59,786 (47%) <75%TRM (low %TRM); 141,765 (53%) never used RM (RM None). RM use was not affected by age or sex, but demonstrated wide geographic and socioeconomic variability. Survival was better in high %TRM versus RM None (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.10; p < 0.001), in high %TRM versus low %TRM (HR: 1.32; p < 0.001), and also in low %TRM versus RM None (HR: 1.58; p < 0.001). The same relationship was observed when assessed by individual device type. CONCLUSIONS: RM is associated with improved survival, irrespective of device type (including PMs), but demonstrates a graded relationship with the level of adherence. The results support the increased application of RM to improve patient outcomes.


Assuntos
Terapia de Ressincronização Cardíaca/mortalidade , Desfibriladores Implantáveis , Cardioversão Elétrica/mortalidade , Marca-Passo Artificial , Cooperação do Paciente , Tecnologia de Sensoriamento Remoto/mortalidade , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Terapia de Ressincronização Cardíaca/métodos , Estudos de Coortes , Cardioversão Elétrica/métodos , Feminino , Seguimentos , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Tecnologia de Sensoriamento Remoto/métodos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Taxa de Sobrevida/tendências
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA