[Early remote monitoring of pacemaker devices and benefits of this paradigm shift. The FAST REMOTE study].
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Valverde Andre I
PROVIDER: S-EPMC10126739 | biostudies-literature | 2023 May
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
[Early remote monitoring of pacemaker devices and benefits of this paradigm shift. The FAST REMOTE study].
Valverde André Irene I González Vasserot Mar M Gonzalez Chana Beatriz B González Matos Carlos C Villagraz Tecedor Lola L García Fernández F Javier FJ
Revista espanola de cardiologia 20221101 5
Similar Datasets
Project description:The current dogma about the heartbeat origin is based on “the pacemaker cell,” a specialized cell residing in the sinoatrial node (SAN) that exhibits spontaneous diastolic depolarization triggering rhythmic action potentials (APs). Recent high-resolution imaging, however, demonstrated that Ca signals and APs in the SAN are heterogeneous, with many cells generating APs of different rates and rhythms or even remaining non-firing (dormant cells), i.e., generating only subthreshold signals. Here we numerically tested a hypothesis that a community of dormant cells can generate normal automaticity, i.e., “the pacemaker cell” is not required to initiate rhythmic cardiac impulses. Our model includes 1) non-excitable cells generating oscillatory local Ca releases and 2) an excitable cell lacking automaticity. While each cell in isolation was not “the pacemaker cell”, the cell system generated rhythmic APs: The subthreshold signals of non-excitable cells were transformed into respective membrane potential oscillations via electrogenic Na/Ca exchange and further transferred and integrated (computed) by the excitable cells to reach its AP threshold, generating rhythmic pacemaking. Cardiac impulse is an emergent property of the SAN cellular network and can be initiated by cells lacking intrinsic automaticity. Cell heterogeneity, weak coupling, subthreshold signals, and their summation are critical properties of the new pacemaker mechanism, i.e., cardiac pacemaker can operate via a signaling process basically similar to that of “temporal summation” happening in a neuron with input from multiple presynaptic cells. The new mechanism, however, does not refute the classical pacemaker cell-based mechanism: both mechanisms can co-exist and interact within SAN tissue.
| S-EPMC9780451 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsRemote monitoring (RM) is considered as a standard of care for pacemaker recipients. Remote monitoring systems provide calendar-based intracardiac electrogram recordings (IEGM) only with the current pacemaker settings (passive IEGM). PREMS (Pacemaker Remote Electrogram Monitoring Study), an observational, multicentre trial, prospectively evaluated the clinical value of an active IEGM (aIEGM), including three 10-s sections (passive IEGM, encouraged sensing, and encouraged pacing), compared to other RM data and to its passive IEGM section. Secondary objectives included the added value of the aIEGM to fully assess the sensing and pacing functions of each lead.Methods and resultsPatients were enrolled within 3 months after pacemaker implantation and followed until the first transmitted aIEGM, which was analysed together with all other RM data. In total, 567 patients were enrolled (79 ± 9 years, 62% men, 19% single-chamber, and 81% dual-chamber pacemakers). Of 547 aIEGMs transmitted in 547 patients, 161 [29.4%; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 25.6-33.3%] indicated at least one anomaly non-detectable with certainty-or at all-on other RM data, including atrial arrhythmia, extrasystoles, undersensing, oversensing, and loss of capture. In 21.7% of cases the detected events deserved a corrective action. The sensing and pacing function of each lead could be fully assessed in 77.3% of aIEGM (95% CI 72.6-82.0%) vs. 15.5% (95% CI 11.4-19.6%) when considering only the passive IEGM section (P < 0.001).ConclusionAn active IEGM improves the clinical value of remote pacemaker follow-up. Furthermore, compared to a passive IEGM, the aIEGM increases the capability to fully assess remotely the sensing and pacing functions.
| S-EPMC6321961 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Atrial fibrillation (AF) and Atrial Tachyarrhythmias (AT) are the most common clinical arrhythmias and their worst issue is a well-recognized correlation with ischemic stroke. High incidence of "subclinical" AF/ATs has been demonstrated in several trials (TRENDS, ASSERT, CRYSTAL AF, EMBRACE) in patients with both cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDS) and external loop recorders. Moreover, a relationship between device-detected AF/ATs and stroke risk has been observed in the same studies. However, while the net clinical benefit of the antithrombotic treatment is well established in patients with "clinical" atrial fibrillation, there may be a lower benefit in patients with device-detected arrhythmias. Subclinical AF/ATs may be considered as a marker of stroke risk rather than the proximate cause and their burden may be used in combination with CHA2DS2-VASC and HAS-BLED scores to identify high-risk population who deserves anticoagulation. Today the remote monitoring associated with the CIEDs is effective in the early detecting of AF/ATs by avoiding delays in the therapy evaluation, as demonstrated by several trials (TRUST, CONNECT, COMPAS). However clinical evidence for stroke risk reduction by remote monitoring is still awaited; the recent trial IMPACT failed to demonstrate that the handling of the anticoagulation therapy guided by device-detected ATs and remote monitoring improves the patients' outcome. The challenges for clinicians are to deal with the huge data entry, to define new organizational models, to improve device patient management and to continuously update AF guidelines in according to the great amount of data offered by the new technology.
| S-EPMC5135181 | biostudies-other
Project description:Background: Remote monitoring of cardiac implantable electronic devices improves clinical outcomes, but data on the association between the transmission rate (TR) of the remote monitoring, calculated in percentage as the ratio between days of transmission and days of follow-up after remote monitoring introduction, and death in patients with a pacemaker are limited. Methods and Results: In this single-center retrospective observational study, we investigated 180 patients with a newly implanted pacemaker capable of using a specific remote monitoring system with daily transmission (79.5±8.8 years, men 50.6%). The study endpoint was all-cause death. During the follow-up period (median 2.7 years), 33 all-cause deaths were reported, and the TR was significantly lower in the deceased patients than in the survivors (89.6±9.6% vs. 95.4±7.0%, P<0.001). The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve for TR to predict all-cause death was 0.72 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.62-0.81, P<0.001). A TR of 95% had sensitivity of 74.1% and specificity of 63.6% for predicting all-cause death. In the multivariate Cox regression analysis, TR <95% was selected as a predictor of all-cause death (hazard ratio 3.43, 95% CI 1.61-7.27, P=0.001). Conclusions: Low TR is a predictor of all-cause death in patients with a pacemaker. Patients with TR ≥95% may experience a lower incidence of death, and should have a good prognosis.
| S-EPMC7819664 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHigh adherence to remote monitoring (RM) in pacemaker (PM) patients improves outcomes; however, adherence remains suboptimal. Bluetooth low-energy (BLE) technology in newer-generation PMs enables communication directly with patient-owned smart devices using an app without a bedside console.ObjectiveTo evaluate the success rate of scheduled RM transmissions using the app compared to other RM methods.MethodsThe BlueSync Field Evaluation was a prospective, international cohort evaluation, measuring the success rate of scheduled RM transmissions using a BLE PM or cardiac resynchronization therapy PM coupled with the MyCareLink Heart app. App transmission success was compared to 3 historical "control" groups from the Medtronic de-identified CareLink database: (1) PM patients with manual communication using a wand with a bedside console (PM manual transmission), (2) PM patients with wireless automatic communication with the bedside console (PM wireless); (3) defibrillator patients with similar automatic communication (defibrillator wireless).ResultsAmong 245 patients enrolled (age 64.8±15.6 years, 58.4% men), 953 transmissions were scheduled through 12 months, of which 902 (94.6%) were successfully completed. In comparison, transmission success rates were 56.3% for PM manual transmission patients, 77.0% for PM wireless patients, and 87.1% for defibrillator wireless patients. Transmission success with the app was superior across matched cohorts based on age, sex, and device type (single vs dual vs triple chamber).ConclusionThe success rate of scheduled RM transmissions was higher among patients using the smart device app compared to patients using traditional RM using bedside consoles. This novel technology may improve patient engagement and adherence to RM.
| S-EPMC8505204 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsRemote monitoring for patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) is well established in clinical routine and recommended by current guidelines. Nevertheless, data regarding patients' perceptions are limited. Therefore, this study aims to analyze the patient perspectives on the remote monitoring of cardiac devices in Germany.Methods and resultsPatients with CIEDs and remote monitoring of all current manufacturers from three German centers were asked to participate. The questionnaire consisted of 37 questions regarding the patients' individual use and perspectives on remote monitoring. Survey participation was anonymous and on a voluntary basis. A total of 617 patients (71.6% men) participated. Most patients reported feeling well informed (69.3%) and reported having unchanged or improved coping (98.8%) since the start of remote monitoring. At least 39.7% of patients experienced technical problems regarding the transmitter, whereas most patients (60.3%) reported that they never noted technical issues. Older patients had significantly less interest than younger patients in using their own smartphones for data transfer (p < 0.001).ConclusionPatients with remote follow-up of CIED reported that they felt well informed about the remote monitoring approach. Remote monitoring can support coping with their disease. With remote monitoring, patients experienced a prolongation of intervals of in-person follow-up visits, and especially younger patients would appreciate smartphone-based data transfer of their CIEDs.
| S-EPMC10017432 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Purpose of reviewRemote monitoring (RM) of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) is recommended as part of the individualized multidisciplinary follow-up of heart failure (HF) patients. Aim of this article is to critically review recent findings on RM, highlighting potential benefits and barriers to its implementation.Recent findingsDevice-based RM is useful in the early detection of CIEDs technical issues and cardiac arrhythmias. Moreover, RM allows the continuous monitoring of several patients' clinical parameters associated with impending HF decompensation, but there is still uncertainty regarding its effectiveness in reducing mortality and hospitalizations. Implementation of RM strategies, together with a proactive physicians' attitude towards clinical actions in response to RM data reception, will make RM a more valuable tool, potentially leading to better outcomes.
| S-EPMC8102149 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Professional practice guidelines recommend that pacemaker recipients be followed regularly. However, the majority of scheduled ambulatory visits is unproductive and imposes a heavy burden on the health-care system.The COMPAS randomized, multicentre, non-inferiority trial examined the safety of long-term remote monitoring of pacemakers. Between December 2005 and January 2008, 538 patients were randomly assigned to remote monitoring follow-up (active group) vs. standard care (control group). The primary objective was to confirm that the proportion of patients who experienced at least one major adverse event (MAE), including all-cause death and hospitalizations for device-related or cardiovascular adverse events, was not >7% higher in the active than in the control group. MAE-free survivals and quality of life were compared in both groups. The characteristics of the study groups were similar. Over a follow-up of 18.3 months, 17.3% of patients in the active and 19.1% in the control group experienced at least one MAE (P < 0.01 for non-inferiority). Hospitalizations for atrial arrhythmias (6 vs. 18) and strokes (2 vs. 8) were fewer (P < 0.05), and the number of interim ambulatory visits was 56% lower (P < 0.001) in the active than the control group. Changes in pacemaker programming or drug regimens were made in 62% of visits in the active vs. 29% in the control group (P < 0.001). Quality of life remained unchanged in both groups.Remote monitoring was a safe alternative to conventional care and significantly lowered the number of ambulatory visits during long-term follow-up of permanently paced patients. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00989326.
| S-EPMC3341630 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAdvances in smart technology have expanded into the field of orthopedic surgery to deliver enhanced patient care. Smart technology has also raised important issues regarding protected patient information. The purpose of this study is to determine patient preferences regarding smart technology in their postarthroplasty care.MethodsPatient surveys were administered in the office setting of 2 adult reconstructive orthopedic surgeons during a 4-week period. Surveys queried patient demographics, twelve yes/no questions, five continuous agree/disagree statements, and a single free-text question. Logistic regression and statistical significance testing were performed.ResultsOf the study patients, 83.6% were willing to wear a device. Women were more likely to consent to a monitoring device and have activity data collected than men (P < .05). Younger patients were more likely to consent to a device and have data collected than octogenarians. Nearly 90% of respondents indicated peace of mind with data being constantly tracked. However, 64% of respondents had hesitations about a surgically implanted device that was independent of a previous arthroplasty surgery (P < .05).ConclusionsPatients are comfortable with smart technology being involved in their postoperative care, especially younger patients and women. Older individuals, possibly with less experience using smart technology in their lives, were not as willing to wear smart devices or have their data collected. Nearly two-thirds of patients had hesitations about surgically implanted smart devices. Further investigation is needed to understand hesitations concerning smart implants as the orthopedic community enters an era of commercially available smart implants in total joint arthroplasty.
| S-EPMC9713269 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRemote monitoring (RM) in patients with advanced heart failure and cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators (CRT-D) may reduce delays in clinical decisions by transmitting automatic alerts. However, this strategy has never been tested specifically in this patient population, with alerts for lung fluid overload, and in a European setting.ObjectiveThe main objective of Phase 1 (presented here) is to evaluate if RM strategy is able to reduce time from device-detected events to clinical decisions.MethodsIn this multicenter randomized controlled trial, patients with moderate to severe heart failure implanted with CRT-D devices were randomized to a Remote group (with remote follow-up and wireless automatic alerts) or to a Control group (with standard follow-up without alerts). The primary endpoint of Phase 1 was the delay between an alert event and clinical decisions related to the event in the first 154 enrolled patients followed for 1 year.ResultsThe median delay from device-detected events to clinical decisions was considerably shorter in the Remote group compared to the Control group: 2 (25(th)-75(th) percentile, 1-4) days vs 29 (25(th)-75(th) percentile, 3-51) days respectively, P=.004. In-hospital visits were reduced in the Remote group (2.0 visits/patient/year vs 3.2 visits/patient/year in the Control group, 37.5% relative reduction, P<.001). Automatic alerts were successfully transmitted in 93% of events occurring outside the hospital in the Remote group. The annual rate of all-cause hospitalizations per patient did not differ between the two groups (P=.65).ConclusionsRM in CRT-D patients with advanced heart failure allows physicians to promptly react to clinically relevant automatic alerts and significantly reduces the burden of in-hospital visits.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT00885677; http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT00885677 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6IkcCJ7NF).
| S-EPMC3758044 | biostudies-literature