Impact of preprocedural left ventricular systolic function on the safety and durability of percutaneous coronary intervention.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is considered less safe in patients with reduced ejection fraction (EF), an impression based on older data. Whether the safety and durability of contemporary PCI are different in patients with reduced EF compared with normal EF patients is unknown. METHODS: Patients from the BIOFLOW II, IV and V clinical trials were grouped as normal EF (≥50%) and reduced EF (30%-50%). Using multivariable logistic regression and cox proportional hazards regression, we determined relations of EF category with procedural safety (a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, stroke and urgent coronary artery bypass grafting within 30 days of PCI) and target lesion failure (TLF; comprising cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization within 1 year of PCI) respectively. In sensitivity analyses, we regrouped patients into EF < 45% and ≥55% and repeated the aforementioned analyses. RESULTS: In 1685 patients with normal EF (mean age 65 years; 27% women; mean EF 61%) and 259 with low EF (mean age 64 years; 17% women; mean EF 41%), 101 safety and 148 TLF events occurred. Compared with patients in the normal EF group, those with reduced EF had neither a statistically significant higher proportion of safety events, nor a higher multivariable-adjusted risk for such events. Similarly, patients with reduced EF and normal EF did not differ in terms of TLF event proportions or multivariable-adjusted risk for TLF. The results were similar in sensitivity analyses with EF groups redefined to create a 10% between-group EF separation. CONCLUSION: PCI safety and durability outcomes are similar in patients with mild-moderately reduced EF and normal EF.

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.

Alert-Based ICD Follow-Up: A Model of Digitally Driven Remote Patient Monitoring.

OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to test whether continuous automatic remote patient monitoring (RPM) linked to centralized analytics reduces nonactionable in-person patient evaluation (IPE) but maintains detection of at-risk patients and provides actionable notifications. BACKGROUND: Conventional ambulatory care requires frequent IPEs. Many encounters are nonactionable, and additional unscheduled IPEs occur. METHODS: Patients receiving implantable cardioverter-defibrillators for Class I/IIa indications were randomized (2:1) to RPM or conventional follow-up, and they were followed up for 15 months. IPEs were conducted every 3 months in the conventional care group but at 3 and 15 months with RPM. Groups were compared for patient retention, nonactionable IPEs, and discovery of at-risk patients during 1 year of exclusive RPM. Frequency and value of RPM alerts were assessed. RESULTS: Patients enrolled (mean age 63.5 ± 12.8 years; male 71.9%; left ventricular ejection fraction 29.0 ± 10.7%; primary prevention 72.3%; n = 1450) were similar between groups (977 RPM vs. 473 conventional care). Mean follow-up durations were 407 ± 103 days for the RPM group versus 399 ± 111 days for the conventional care group (p = 0.165). Patient attrition to follow-up was 42% greater with conventional care (20.1% [87 of 431]) versus RPM (14.2% [129 of 908]; p = 0.007). Nonactionable IPEs were reduced 81% by RPM (0.7 per patient year) compared with conventional care (3.6 per patient year; p < 0.001) but event discoveries remained similar (2.9 per patient year). In RPM, alert rate was median 1 per patient (interquartile range: 0 to 3) with >50% actionability, indicating low volume but high clinical value. Unscheduled IPE was the basis for discovery of 100% of intercurrent problems in RPM and also 75% in conventional care, indicating limited value of appointment-based follow-up for problem discovery. The number of IPEs needed to discover an actionable event was 8.2 in Conventional, 4.9 in RPM, and 2.1 when alert driven (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: RPM transformed ambulatory care to IPE directed to those patients with clinically actionable events when required. Filtering patient information by digitally driven remote monitoring expends fewer clinic resources while providing a greater yield of actionable interventions. (Lumos-T Safely Reduces Routine Office Device Follow-up [TRUST]; NCT00336284).

Automatic remote monitoring utilizing daily transmissions: transmission reliability and implantable cardioverter defibrillator battery longevity in the TRUST trial.

Aims: Benefits of automatic remote home monitoring (HM) among implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) patients may require high transmission frequency. However, transmission reliability and effects on battery longevity remain uncertain. We hypothesized that HM would have high transmission success permitting punctual guideline based follow-up, and improve battery longevity. This was tested in the prospective randomized TRUST trial. Methods and results: Implantable cardioverter defibrillator patients were randomized post-implant 2:1 to HM (n = 908) (transmit daily) or to Conventional in-person monitoring [conventional management (CM), n = 431 (HM disabled)]. In both groups, five evaluations were scheduled every 3 months for 15 months. Home Monitoring technology performance was assessed by transmissions received vs. total possible, and number of scheduled HM checks failing because of missed transmissions. Battery longevity was compared in HM vs. CM at 15 months, and again in HM 3 years post-implant using continuously transmitted data. Transmission success per patient was 91% (median follow-up of 434 days). Overall, daily HM transmissions were received in 315 795 of a potential 363 450 days (87%). Only 55/3759 (1.46%) of unsuccessful scheduled evaluations in HM were attributed to transmission loss. Shock frequency and pacing percentage were similar in HM vs. CM. Fifteen month battery longevity was 12% greater in HM (93.2 ± 8.8% vs. 83.5 ± 6.0% CM, P < 0.001). In extended follow-up of HM patients, estimated battery longevity was 50.9 ± 9.1% (median 52%) at 36 months. Conclusion: Automatic remote HM demonstrated robust transmission reliability. Daily transmission load may be sustained without reducing battery longevity. Home Monitoring conserves battery longevity and tracks long term device performance. Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT00336284.

Role of Automatic Wireless Remote Monitoring Immediately Following ICD Implant: The Lumos-T Reduces Routine Office Device Follow-Up Study (TRUST) Trial.

INTRODUCTION: The incidence of unscheduled encounters and problem occurrence between ICD implant and first in-person evaluation (IPE) recommended at 12 weeks is unknown. Automatic remote home monitoring (HM) may be useful in this potentially unstable period. METHODS AND RESULTS: ICD patients were randomized 2:1 to HM enabled post-implant (n = 908) or to conventional monitoring (CM; n = 431). Groups were compared between implant and prior to first scheduled IPE for IPE incidence, causes, and actionability (reprogramming, system revision, medication changes) and event detection time. HM and CM patients were similar (mean age 63 years, 72% male, LVEF 29%, primary prevention 73%, DDD 57%). In the post-implant interval assessed (HM 100 ± 21.3 days vs. CM 101 ± 20.8 days, P = 0.54), 85.4% (776/908) HM patients and 87.7% CM (378/431) patients had no cause for IPE (P = 0.31). When IPE occurred, actionability in HM (64/177 [36.2%]) was greater versus CM (15/62 [24.2%], P = 0.12). Actionable items were discovered sooner with HM (P = 0.025). Device reprogramming or lead revision was triggered following 53/177 (29.9%) IPEs in HM versus 9/62 (14.5%) in CM (P = 0.018). Arrhythmia detection was enhanced by HM: 276 atrial and ventricular episodes were detected in 135 follow-ups in contrast to CM (65 episodes at 17 IPEs). More silent arrhythmic episodes were discovered by HM (7.2% vs. 1.5% [P = 0.15]). Since 27/42 (64.3%) IPEs driven by HM alerts were actionable, event notification was a valuable method for problem detection. Importantly, HM did not increase incidence of non-actionable IPEs (P = 0.72). CONCLUSION: Activation of automatic remote monitoring should be encouraged soon post-ICD implant.

Clinical safety of the Iforia implantable cardioverter-defibrillator system in patients subjected to thoracic spine and cardiac 1.5-T magnetic resonance imaging scanning conditions.

BACKGROUND: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) are generally considered a contraindication to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the ProMRI Phase C study, a multicenter, prospective, single-arm, nonrandomized study, was to evaluate the clinical safety of the Biotronik ProMRI Iforia ICD system during MRI. METHODS: Patients were enrolled after ICD implantation, with either a dual-chamber DR-T or single-lead VR-T DX system. Study-defined, nondiagnostic cardiac or thoracic spine MRI was performed at least 1 week after enrollment. ICDs were placed into MRI mode with ventricular fibrillation (VF) detection/therapy programmed "off" before scan and restored to non-MRI mode after scan. Interrogation was performed before, immediately after, and 1 month post-MRI. The primary end-points were (1) ventricular pacing threshold increase >0.5 V from pre-MRI to 1 month post-MRI; (2) R-wave amplitude decrease >50% from pre-MRI to 1 month post-MRI or R-wave amplitude <5 mV at 1 month post-MRI; and (3) MRI and ICD system-related serious adverse device effects. RESULTS: One hundred seventy patients were enrolled at 39 US centers. One hundred fifty-three patients underwent MRI (25.7% cardiac, 74.3% thoracic spine) and completed follow-up. Freedom from the primary end-points was met in all but 1 subject, in whom reduced R-wave amplitude was detected 1 month post-MRI. No serious adverse device effects occurred during the course of the study. CONCLUSION: These results demonstrate the clinical safety and efficacy of the ProMRI ICD system in patients subjected to thoracic spine and cardiac MRI imaging in 1.5-T scanners.

Superiority of automatic remote monitoring compared with in-person evaluation for scheduled ICD follow-up in the TRUST trial - testing execution of the recommendations.

AIMS: To test recommended implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) follow-up methods by 'in-person evaluations' (IPE) vs. 'remote Home Monitoring' (HM). METHODS AND RESULTS: ICD patients were randomized 2:1 to automatic HM or to Conventional monitoring, with follow-up checks scheduled at 3, 6, 9, 12, and 15 months post-implant. Conventional patients were evaluated with IPE only. Home Monitoring patients were assessed remotely only for 1 year between 3 and 15 month evaluations. Adherence to follow-up was measured. HM and Conventional patients were similar (age 63 years, 72% male, left ventricular ejection fraction 29%, primary prevention 73%, DDD 57%). Conventional management suffered greater patient attrition during the trial (20.1 vs. 14.2% in HM, P = 0.007). Three month follow-up occurred in 84% in both groups. There was 100% adherence (5 of 5 checks) in 47.3% Conventional vs. 59.7% HM (P < 0.001). Between 3 and 15 months, HM exhibited superior (2.2×) adherence to scheduled follow-up [incidence of failed follow up was 146 of 2421 (6.0%) in HM vs. 145 of 1098 (13.2%) in Conventional, P < 0.001] and punctuality. In HM (daily transmission success rate median 91%), transmission loss caused only 22 of 2275 (0.97%) failed HM evaluations between 3 and 15 months; others resulted from clinic oversight. Overall IPE failure rate in Conventional [193 of 1841 (10.5%) exceeded that in HM [97 of 1484 (6.5%), P < 0.001] by 62%, i.e. HM patients remained more loyal to IPE when this was mandated. CONCLUSION: Automatic remote monitoring better preserves patient retention and adherence to scheduled follow-up compared with IPE. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00336284.

Same-day discovery of implantable cardioverter defibrillator dysfunction in the TRUST remote monitoring trial: influence of contrasting messaging systems.

AIMS: Assess whether automatic remote home monitoring (HM) permits same-day evaluation of implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) system dysfunction. METHODS AND RESULTS: Compromised ICD system integrity (generator/lead) demands prompt evaluation. Home monitoring promises earlier discovery but may be limited by technological differences and follow-up mechanism. We tested whether HM enabled event review within 24 h, and contrasted differing messaging mechanisms. Nine hundred and eight patients in the TRUST prospective multicentre trial were followed by HM for 15 months. ICD system problems automatically triggered notifications: repeatedly ('redundant') for impedance deviations and elective replacement indication (ERI), but only a single transmission for '30 J ineffective'. Detection time from event onset to physician evaluation was measured. Forty-three system-related alerts occurred; 42% were asymptomatic, 42% were actionable, and 22 of 43 (51%) were viewed within 24 h. Redundant notifications were: 1 ERI, 9 shock impedance, 2 ventricular and 6 atrial pacing impedance. Most (11/18; 61%) were detected in <24 h. Others elicited daily notifications without interruption until resolution. For single transmissions, 11 of 25 (44%) events were detected on the same day. Most (56%, 14/25) were detected between 1 and 39 days (mean 10.0 ± 13.0 days). Ten of 14 events were detected by HM and 4 at the time of office visits. These observations suggest single transmissions were vulnerable to detection failure. Mean detection time of redundant events was 1.1 ± 1.8 vs. single transmission 5.6 ± 10.9 days (P = 0.05). Hence, redundant notification avoided late detection. CONCLUSION: Same-day discovery of ICD dysfunction, even if asymptomatic, was achievable. For those events not evaluated within 24 h, repetitive messaging promoted earlier discovery. Reorganization of clinical follow-up methods may maintain early reaction ability.

Automatic remote monitoring of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator lead and generator performance: the Lumos-T Safely RedUceS RouTine Office Device Follow-Up (TRUST) trial.

BACKGROUND: Monitoring performance of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) generators and leads is important. Methods available are with in-person evaluations or by automatic remote home monitoring (HM). These were prospectively evaluated and compared in the TRUST trial. The HM technology tested performed daily self-checks and databasing with rapid event notifications for out-of-range (including asymptomatic) conditions. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients (n=1339) were randomly assigned after ICD implant 2:1 to HM or to conventional groups. Both groups underwent scheduled checks every 3 months and were followed for 15 months. In HM, in-person office visits were scheduled at 3 and 15 months. At 6, 9, and 12 months, HM only was used with subsequent office visits if necessary. Between these time points, ICDs triggered event notifications for system integrity problems. Patients randomly assigned to conventional follow-up were evaluated with office visits only. HM and conventional patients were similar (age, 63.3±12.8 versus 64.0±12.1 years; 72.0% versus 73.1% male; New York Heart Association II class, 55.9% versus 60.4%; left ventricular ejection fraction, 29.0±10.7% versus 28.5±9.8%; coronary artery disease, 64.8% versus 71.7%; primary prevention, 72.2% versus 73.8%; DDD devices, 57.8% versus 56.6%). Four patients crossed over from conventional to HM because of advisories. Scheduled checks were more successfully accomplished in HM (92.7% versus 89.2% in conventional, P<0.001). Sixty-two device-related events (53 in HM versus 9 in conventional) were observed in 46 patients (40 [4.4%] in HM versus 6 [1.39%] in conventional, P=0.004). Forty-seven percent were asymptomatic. HM detected generator and lead problems earlier (HM versus conventional: median, 1 versus 5 days; P=0.05). A total of 20 device problems (eg, lead fracture, elective replacement indicators) requiring surgical revision (0.012 per patient-year) were found, 15 in HM and 5 in the conventional groups. Other events were managed nonsurgically (eg, reprogramming, initiation of antiarrhythmics). CONCLUSIONS: ICD lead and generator malfunction was infrequent and often asymptomatic. Only a minority of detected events required surgical intervention. Automatic HM enhanced discovery, permitted prompt detection, and facilitated management decisions. Longitudinal parameter trending, with component function evaluated daily by remote monitoring, may enable long-term performance assessment. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00336284.