Analysis of arrhythmic events is useful to detect lead failure earlier in patients followed by remote monitoring

Artificial intelligence to detect noise events in remote monitoring data

Background

Remote monitoring (RM) of cardiac implantable electrical devices (CIEDs) can detect various events early. However, the diagnostic ability of CIEDs has not been sufficient, especially for lead failure. The first notification of lead failure was almost noise events, which were detected as arrhythmia by the CIED. A human must analyze the intracardiac electrogram to accurately detect lead failure. However, the number of arrhythmic events is too large for human analysis. Artificial intelligence (AI) seems to be helpful in the early and accurate detection of lead failure before human analysis.

Objective

To test whether a neural network can be trained to precisely identify noise events in the intracardiac electrogram of RM data.

Methods

We analyzed 21 918 RM data consisting of 12 925 and 1884 Medtronic and Boston Scientific data, respectively. Among these, 153 and 52 Medtronic and Boston Scientific data, respectively, were diagnosed as noise events by human analysis. In Medtronic, 306 events, including 153 noise events and randomly selected 153 out of 12 692 nonnoise events, were analyzed in a five-fold cross-validation with a convolutional neural network. The Boston Scientific data were analyzed similarly.

Results

The precision rate, recall rate, F1 score, accuracy rate, and the area under the curve were 85.8 ± 4.0%, 91.6 ± 6.7%, 88.4 ± 2.0%, 88.0 ± 2.0%, and 0.958 ± 0.021 in Medtronic and 88.4 ± 12.8%, 81.0 ± 9.3%, 84.1 ± 8.3%, 84.2 ± 8.3% and 0.928 ± 0.041 in Boston Scientific. Five-fold cross-validation with a weighted loss function could increase the recall rate.

Conclusions

AI can accurately detect noise events. AI analysis may be helpful for detecting lead failure events early and accurately.

2023 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS expert consensus statement on practical management of the remote device clinic

Remote monitoring is beneficial for the management of patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices by impacting morbidity and mortality. With increasing numbers of patients using remote monitoring, keeping up with higher volume of remote monitoring transmissions creates challenges for device clinic staff. This international multidisciplinary document is intended to guide cardiac electrophysiologists, allied professionals, and hospital administrators in managing remote monitoring clinics. This includes guidance for remote monitoring clinic staffing, appropriate clinic workflows, patient education, and alert management. This expert consensus statement also addresses other topics such as communication of transmission results, use of third-party resources, manufacturer responsibilities, and programming concerns. The goal is to provide evidence-based recommendations impacting all aspects of remote monitoring services. Gaps in current knowledge and guidance for future research directions are also identified.

2023 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS Expert Consensus Statement on Practical Management of the Remote Device Clinic

Remote monitoring is beneficial for the management of patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices by impacting morbidity and mortality. With increasing numbers of patients using remote monitoring, keeping up with higher volume of remote monitoring transmissions creates challenges for device clinic staff. This international multidisciplinary document is intended to guide cardiac electrophysiologists, allied professionals, and hospital administrators in managing remote monitoring clinics. This includes guidance for remote monitoring clinic staffing, appropriate clinic workflows, patient education, and alert management. This expert consensus statement also addresses other topics such as communication of transmission results, use of third-party resources, manufacturer responsibilities, and programming concerns. The goal is to provide evidence-based recommendations impacting all aspects of remote monitoring services. Gaps in current knowledge and guidance for future research directions are also identified.

2023 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS Expert Consensus Statement on Practical Management of the Remote Device Clinic

Remote monitoring is beneficial for the management of patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices by impacting morbidity and mortality. With increasing numbers of patients using remote monitoring, keeping up with higher volume of remote monitoring transmissions creates challenges for device clinic staff. This international multidisciplinary document is intended to guide cardiac electrophysiologists, allied professionals, and hospital administrators in managing remote monitoring clinics. This includes guidance for remote monitoring clinic staffing, appropriate clinic workflows, patient education, and alert management. This expert consensus statement also addresses other topics such as communication of transmission results, use of third-party resources, manufacturer responsibilities, and programming concerns. The goal is to provide evidence-based recommendations impacting all aspects of remote monitoring services. Gaps in current knowledge and guidance for future research directions are also identified.

Remote Monitoring of CIEDs-For Both Safety, Economy and Convenience?

Cardiac implantable electronic devices such as pacemakers and defibrillators are increasingly monitored by systems transmitting information directly from the patient to the hospital. This may increase safety and patient satisfaction and also under certain circumstances represent an economic advantage. The review summarizes some of the recent research in the field of remote monitoring of cardiac devices.

2021 PACES expert consensus statement on the indications and management of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices in pediatric patients

In view of the increasing complexity of both cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) and patients in the current era, practice guidelines, by necessity, have become increasingly specific. This document is an expert consensus statement that has been developed to update and further delineate indications and management of CIEDs in pediatric patients, defined as ≤21 years of age, and is intended to focus primarily on the indications for CIEDs in the setting of specific disease categories. The document also highlights variations between previously published adult and pediatric CIED recommendations and provides rationale for underlying important differences. The document addresses some of the deterrents to CIED access in low- and middle-income countries and strategies to circumvent them. The document sections were divided up and drafted by the writing committee members according to their expertise. The recommendations represent the consensus opinion of the entire writing committee, graded by class of recommendation and level of evidence. Several questions addressed in this document either do not lend themselves to clinical trials or are rare disease entities, and in these instances recommendations are based on consensus expert opinion. Furthermore, specific recommendations, even when supported by substantial data, do not replace the need for clinical judgment and patient-specific decision-making. The recommendations were opened for public comment to Pediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society (PACES) members and underwent external review by the scientific and clinical document committee of the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the science advisory and coordinating committee of the American Heart Association (AHA), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), and the Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC). The document received endorsement by all the collaborators and the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), the Indian Heart Rhythm Society (IHRS), and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS). This document is expected to provide support for clinicians and patients to allow for appropriate CIED use, appropriate CIED management, and appropriate CIED follow-up in pediatric patients.

2021 PACES Expert Consensus Statement on the Indications and Management of Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Devices in Pediatric Patients: Developed in collaboration with and endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), the American Heart Association (AHA), and the Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC) Endorsed by the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), the Indian Heart Rhythm Society (IHRS), and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS)

In view of the increasing complexity of both cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) and patients in the current era, practice guidelines, by necessity, have become increasingly specific. This document is an expert consensus statement that has been developed to update and further delineate indications and management of CIEDs in pediatric patients, defined as ≤21 years of age, and is intended to focus primarily on the indications for CIEDs in the setting of specific disease categories. The document also highlights variations between previously published adult and pediatric CIED recommendations and provides rationale for underlying important differences. The document addresses some of the deterrents to CIED access in low- and middle-income countries and strategies to circumvent them. The document sections were divided up and drafted by the writing committee members according to their expertise. The recommendations represent the consensus opinion of the entire writing committee, graded by class of recommendation and level of evidence. Several questions addressed in this document either do not lend themselves to clinical trials or are rare disease entities, and in these instances recommendations are based on consensus expert opinion. Furthermore, specific recommendations, even when supported by substantial data, do not replace the need for clinical judgment and patient-specific decision-making. The recommendations were opened for public comment to Pediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society (PACES) members and underwent external review by the scientific and clinical document committee of the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the science advisory and coordinating committee of the American Heart Association (AHA), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), and the Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC). The document received endorsement by all the collaborators and the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), the Indian Heart Rhythm Society (IHRS), and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS). This document is expected to provide support for clinicians and patients to allow for appropriate CIED use, appropriate CIED management, and appropriate CIED follow-up in pediatric patients.

2021 PACES expert consensus statement on the indications and management of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices in pediatric patients

In view of the increasing complexity of both cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) and patients in the current era, practice guidelines, by necessity, have become increasingly specific. This document is an expert consensus statement that has been developed to update and further delineate indications and management of CIEDs in pediatric patients, defined as ≤21 years of age, and is intended to focus primarily on the indications for CIEDs in the setting of specific disease categories. The document also highlights variations between previously published adult and pediatric CIED recommendations and provides rationale for underlying important differences. The document addresses some of the deterrents to CIED access in low- and middle-income countries and strategies to circumvent them. The document sections were divided up and drafted by the writing committee members according to their expertise. The recommendations represent the consensus opinion of the entire writing committee, graded by class of recommendation and level of evidence. Several questions addressed in this document either do not lend themselves to clinical trials or are rare disease entities, and in these instances recommendations are based on consensus expert opinion. Furthermore, specific recommendations, even when supported by substantial data, do not replace the need for clinical judgment and patient-specific decision-making. The recommendations were opened for public comment to Pediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society (PACES) members and underwent external review by the scientific and clinical document committee of the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the science advisory and coordinating committee of the American Heart Association (AHA), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), and the Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC). The document received endorsement by all the collaborators and the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), the Indian Heart Rhythm Society (IHRS), and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS). This document is expected to provide support for clinicians and patients to allow for appropriate CIED use, appropriate CIED management, and appropriate CIED follow-up in pediatric patients.

2021 PACES Expert Consensus Statement on the Indications and Management of Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Devices in Pediatric Patients

In view of the increasing complexity of both cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) and patients in the current era, practice guidelines, by necessity, have become increasingly specific. This document is an expert consensus statement that has been developed to update and further delineate indications and management of CIEDs in pediatric patients, defined as ≤21 years of age, and is intended to focus primarily on the indications for CIEDs in the setting of specific disease categories. The document also highlights variations between previously published adult and pediatric CIED recommendations and provides rationale for underlying important differences. The document addresses some of the deterrents to CIED access in low- and middle-income countries and strategies to circumvent them. The document sections were divided up and drafted by the writing committee members according to their expertise. The recommendations represent the consensus opinion of the entire writing committee, graded by class of recommendation and level of evidence. Several questions addressed in this document either do not lend themselves to clinical trials or are rare disease entities, and in these instances recommendations are based on consenus expert opinion. Furthermore, specific recommendations, even when supported by substantial data, do not replace the need for clinical judgment and patient-specific decision-making. The recommendations were opened for public comment to Pediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society (PACES) members and underwent external review by the scientific and clinical document committee of the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the science advisory and coordinating committee of the American Heart Association (AHA), the American College of Cardiology, (ACC) and the Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC). The document received endorsement by all the collaborators and the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), the Indian Heart Rhythm Society (IHRS), and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS). This document is expected to provide support for clinicians and patients to allow for appropriate CIED use, appropriate CIED management, and appropriate follow-up in pediatric patients.

Risk factors for the first and second inappropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy

Introduction

Various risk factors for the first inappropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy event have been reported, including a history of atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter (AF/AFL), younger age, and multiple zones. Nonetheless, which factors are concordant with real-world data has not been clarified, and risk factors for the second inappropriate ICD therapy event have not been well examined. This study aimed to clarify the risk factors for the first and second inappropriate ICD therapy events.

Methods

We conducted a post-hoc secondary analysis of data from a multicenter, prospective observational study (the Nippon Storm Study) designed to clarify the risk factors for electrical storm.

Results

The analysis included data from 1549 patients who received ICD or cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillator (CRT-D). Over a median follow-up of 28 months, 293 inappropriate ICD therapy events occurred in 153 (10.0%) patients. On multivariate Cox regression analysis, the risk factors for the first inappropriate ICD therapy event were younger age (hazard ratio [HR], 0.986; p = 0.028), AF/AFL (HR, 2.324; p = 0.002), ICD without CRT implantation (HR, 2.377; p = 0.004), and multiple zones (HR, 1.852; p = 0.010). “No-intervention” after the first inappropriate ICD therapy event was the sole risk factor for the second inappropriate ICD therapy event.

Conclusions

Risk factors for the first inappropriate ICD therapy event were similar to those previously reported. Immediate intervention after the first inappropriate ICD therapy event could reduce the risk of the second inappropriate event.

Cardiac pacemakers: a basic review of the history and current technology

In the 60 years since the first human implant of a cardiac pacemaker, tremendous improvements have been made to devices themselves as well as the lead systems. Improvement in battery materials has allowed for production of smaller devices with greater longevity and a vast array of technologies allowing for communication between the device and the operator. Lead wires, typically to as the weakest part of the pacing system, have also seen a metamorphosis as improvements in conductor materials and hybrid insulation have been shown to improve reliability. With the recent development of leadless pacing systems, the downfalls of implantable leads can be avoided. These improvements have allowed a more widespread use of cardiac pacing in veterinary applications since the first reported canine implant in 1967.

Increasing Role of Remote Monitoring of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Devices in Improving Outcomes

Remote monitoring has become an essential component of the care of patients with a cardiac implantable electronic device, including those undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator implantations. It allows for earlier detection of battery- and lead-related issue, atrial and ventricular arrhythmias, and may facilitate early identification of patients at risk for developing an exacerbation of heart failure. The data for the clinical utility of remote monitoring have been mixed. Additional studies are ongoing to determine how best to detect heart failure in these patients and how best to manage these patients based on the information.