Intrahospital organizational model of remote monitoring data sharing, for a global management of patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices

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 multiparametric monitoring and management of heart failure patients through cardiac implantable electronic devices

In this review we focus on heart failure (HF) which, as known, is associated with a substantial risk of hospitalizations and adverse cardiovascular outcomes, including death. In recent years, systems to monitor cardiac function and patient parameters have been developed with the aim to detect subclinical pathophysiological changes that precede worsening HF. Several patient-specific parameters can be remotely monitored through cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) and can be combined in multiparametric scores predicting patients' risk of worsening HF with good sensitivity and moderate specificity. Early patient management at the time of pre-clinical alerts remotely transmitted by CIEDs to physicians might prevent hospitalizations. However, it is not clear yet which is the best diagnostic pathway for HF patients after a CIED alert, which kind of medications should be changed or escalated, and in which case in-hospital visits or in-hospital admissions are required. Finally, the specific role of healthcare professionals involved in HF patient management under remote monitoring is still matter of definition. We analyzed recent data on multiparametric monitoring of patients with HF through CIEDs. We provided practical insights on how to timely manage CIED alarms with the aim to prevent worsening HF. We also discussed the role of biomarkers and thoracic echo in this context, and potential organizational models including multidisciplinary teams for remote care of HF patients with CIEDs.

Remote monitoring of cardiac implantable electronic devices and disease management

This reviews the transition of remote monitoring of patients with cardiac electronic implantable devices from curiosity to standard of care. This has been delivered by technology evolution from patient-activated remote interrogations at appointed intervals to continuous monitoring that automatically flags clinically actionable information to the clinic for review. This model has facilitated follow-up and received professional society recommendations. Additionally, continuous monitoring has provided a new level of granularity of diagnostic data enabling extension of patient management from device to disease management. This ushers in an era of digital medicine with wider applications in cardiovascular medicine.

Creation of pacemaker remote monitoring networks between hospital and pharmacies during Covid-19 outbreak

INTRODUCTION

Remote Monitoring (RM) of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices (CIEDs) is proven to be safe and efficient. It has been adopted in our center since years. At the time of the recent Covid-19 outbreak, we introduced and tested a collaborative organizational model, through a new RM device (Totem), creating a network with the surrounding territory and limiting CIED patients' presence in hospital.

METHODS

We involved 4 neighbor pharmacies where Totem devices were installed; we called and informed 64 patients with Totem compatible pacemaker (PM) about the possibility to perform their PM follow-up (FU) in-pharmacy; 58 gave their consent and their data were inserted into our RM database.

RESULTS

During an 18-month FU period, a total of 70 RM transmissions have been received: one alert of high atrial burden triggering a pharmacological optimization, one alert of high ventricular impedance leading to a new ventricular lead implantation and four alerts of elective replacement indicator. Fulfilled questionnaires revealed complete patient satisfaction.

CONCLUSIONS

A collaborative network between our hospital and the surrounding territory to perform RM FUs of CIEDs during Covid-19 pandemic was feasible, leading to patient compliance and satisfaction and revealing important technical and clinical alerts.

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.

Economic analysis of remote monitoring in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators or cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators in the Trento area, Italy

Introduction

Remote monitoring (RM) technologies have the potential to improve patient care by increasing compliance, providing early indications of heart failure (HF), and potentially allowing for therapy optimization to prevent HF admissions. The aim of this retrospective study was to assess the clinical and economic consequences of RM vs. standard monitoring (SM) through in-office cardiology visits, in patients carrying a cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED).

Methods

Clinical and resource consumption data were extracted from the Electrophysiology Registry of the Trento Cardiology Unit, which has been systemically collecting patient information from January 2011 to February 2022. From a clinical standpoint, survival analysis was conducted, and incidence of cardiovascular (CV) related hospitalizations was measured. From an economic standpoint, direct costs of RM and SM were collected to compare the cost per treated patient over a 2-year time horizon. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to reduce the effect of confounding biases and the unbalance of patient characteristics at baseline.

Results

In the enrollment period, N = 402 CIED patients met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis (N = 189 patients followed through SM; N = 213 patients followed through RM). After PSM, comparison was limited to N = 191 patients in each arm. After 2-years follow-up since CIED implantation, mortality rate for any cause was 1.6% in the RM group and 19.9% in the SM group (log-rank test, p < 0.0001). Also, a lower proportion of patients in the RM group (25.1%) were hospitalized for CV-related reasons, compared to the SM group (51.3%; p < 0.0001, two-sample test for proportions). Overall, the implementation of the RM program in the Trento territory was cost-saving in both payer and hospital perspectives. The investment required to fund RM (a fee for service in the payer perspective, and staffing costs for hospitals), was more than offset by the lower rate of hospitalizations for CV-related disease. RM adoption generated savings of -€4,771 and -€6,752 per patient in 2 years, in the payer and hospital perspective, respectively.

Conclusion

RM of patients carrying CIED improves short-term (2-years) morbidity and mortality risks, compared to SM and reduces direct management costs for both hospitals and healthcare services.

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.

HeartInsight: from SELENE HF to implementation in clinical practice

There is strong evidence that remote monitoring in cardiac implantable electronic devices can detect device malfunctions earlier than conventional monitoring and that it can be useful for detecting cardiac arrhythmias, while little data are available for an improved management of heart failure (HF). HeartInsight is a new remote monitoring algorithm developed and validated in the SELENE HF study that combines information from a diverse set of sensors integrated into one alert to detect worsening HF with promising accuracy. However, the shift from detecting technical issues or arrhythmia episodes to early predicting clinical events underscores the need to understand how to properly integrate these tools into the clinical workflow by defining an organizational model and shared guidelines for the management of HF alerts. Here, we critically discuss issues that will be raised by the implementation of this 'enhanced' remote monitoring approach to HF care in daily clinical practice.

Diabetes Remote Monitoring Program Implementation: A Mixed Methods Analysis of Delivery Strategies, Barriers and Facilitators

BACKGROUND

Remote patient monitoring (RPM) is being increasingly utilized as a type of telemedicine modality to improve access to quality health care, although there are documented challenges with this type of innovation. The goals of this study were to characterize clinic delivery strategies for an RPM program and to examine barriers and facilitators to program implementation in a variety of community clinic settings.

METHODS

Primary data were collected via individual and small group interviews and surveys of clinical staff from South Carolina primary care clinics participating in an RPM program for patients with diabetes mellitus type 2 in 2019. We used a parallel convergent mixed methods study design with six South Carolina primary care outpatient clinics currently participating in a diabetes remote monitoring program. Clinic staff participants completed surveys to define delivery strategies and experiences with the program in a variety of clinical settings. Interviews of clinic staff examined barriers and facilitators to program implementation guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Quantitative survey data were summarized via descriptive statistics. Qualitative data from interviews were analyzed in a template analysis approach with primary themes identified and organized by two independent coders and guided by the CFIR. Quantitative and qualitative findings were then synthesized in a final step.

RESULTS

RPM program delivery strategies varied across clinic, patient population, and program domains, largely affected by staffing, leadership buy-in, resources, patient needs, and inter-site communication. Barriers and facilitators to implementation were linked to similar factors that influenced delivery strategy.

DISCUSSION

RPM programs were implemented in a variety of different clinic settings with program delivery tailored to fit within each clinic's workflow and meet patients' needs. By addressing the barriers identified in this study with focused training and support strategies, delivery processes can improve implementation of RPM programs and thus benefit patient outcomes in rural and community settings.

Remote monitoring of pacemakers and defibrillators: Effective and safe in Brazil?

Background

The remote monitoring (RM) of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) has become a common method of in-home monitoring and follow-up in high-income countries given its effectiveness, safety, convenience, and the possibility of early intervention. However, in Brazil, RM is still underutilized.

Objectives

This observational study aims to demonstrate our experience of using RM in Brazil and the predictive factors of RM of CIED follow-up in Brazil.

Methods

This was a prospective cohort study of patients with a CIED. Event rates are reported and clinical responses to those findings and outcomes based on the detection of RM. A logistic regression model was performed to identify predictors of more events, with P < .05 for statistical significance.

Results

This study evaluated consecutive 119 patients: 30.2% with pacemakers, 42.8% with implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, 22.7% with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) with defibrillator, and 3.3% with CRT with pacemaker. Events were detected in 63.9% of the cases in 29.5 ± 23 months of follow-up. The outcomes found were that 44.5% needed elective evaluation in medical treatment and 23.5% needed immediate evaluation in therapy. Logistic regression analysis showed that the groups with CRT or CRT with defibrillator (75.0%), reduced ejection fraction (76.5%), and New York Heart Association functional class ≥II (75.0%) had the highest RM event rates.

Conclusions

RM proved to be effective and safe in the follow-up of patients with CIEDs in Brazil, allowing early interventions and facilitating therapeutic management.

Current status of reimbursement practices for remote monitoring of cardiac implantable electrical devices across Europe

Remote monitoring (RM) of cardiac implantable electrical devices (CIEDs) is currently proposed as a standard of care for CIEDs follow-up, as recommended by major cardiology societies worldwide. By detecting a series of relevant device and patient-related parameters, RM is a valuable option for early detection of CIEDs' technical issues, as well as changes in parameters related to cardio-respiratory functions. Moreover, RM may allow longer spacing between in-office follow-ups and better organization of in-hospital resources. Despite these potential advantages, resulting in improved patient safety, we are still far from a widespread diffusion of RM across Europe. Reimbursement policies across Europe still show an important heterogeneity and have been considered as an important barrier to full implementation of RM as a standard for the follow-up of all the patients with pacemakers, defibrillators, devices for cardiac resynchronization, or implantable loop recorders. Indeed, in many countries, there are still inertia and unresponsiveness to the request for widespread implementation of RM for CIEDs, although an improvement was found in some countries as compared to years ago, related to the provision of some form of reimbursement. As a matter of fact, the COVID-19 pandemic has promoted an increased use of digital health for connecting physicians to patients, even if digital literacy may be a limit for the widespread implementation of telemedicine. CIEDs have the advantage of making possible RM with an already defined organization and reliable systems for data transmissions that can be easily implemented as a standard of care for present and future cardiology practice.

Use of CIED Generated Heart Failure Risk Score (HFRS) Alerts in an Integrated, Multi-Disciplinary Approach to HF Management-A Prospective Cohort Study

Aim: To evaluate use of CIED-generated Heart Failure Risk Score (HFRS) alerts in an integrated, multi-disciplinary approach to HF management. Methods: We undertook a prospective, single centre outcome study of patients implanted with an HFRS-enabled Medtronic CIED, generating a “high risk” alert between November 2018 and November 2020. All patients generating a “high risk” HFRS alert were managed within an integrated HF pathway. Alerts were shared with local HF teams, prompting patient contact and appropriate intervention. Outcome data on health care utilisation (HCU) and mortality were collected. A validated questionnaire was completed by the HF teams to obtain feedback. Results: 367 “High risk” alerts were noted in 188 patients. The mean patient age was 70 and 49% had a Charlson Comorbidity Score of >6. Mean number of alerts per patients was 1.95 and 44 (23%) of patients had >3 “high risk” alerts in the follow up period. Overall, 75 (39%) patients were hospitalised in the 4−6-week period of the alert; 53 (28%) were unplanned of which 24 (13%) were for decompensated HF. A total of 33 (18%) patients died in the study period. Having three or more alerts significantly increased the risk of hospitalisation for heart failure (HR 2.5, CI 1.1−5.6 p = 0.03). The feedback on the pathway was positive. Conclusions: Patients with “high risk” alerts are co-morbid and have significant HCU. An integrated approach can facilitate timely risk stratification and intervention. Intervention in these patients is not limited to HF alone and provides the opportunity for holistic management of this complex cohort.

Telemedical Monitoring Based on Implantable Devices-the Evolution Beyond the CardioMEMS™ Technology

Purpose of the Review

We aimed to provide an overview of telemedical monitoring and its impact on outcomes among heart failure (HF) patients.

Recent Findings

Most HF readmissions may be prevented if clinical parameters are strictly controlled via telemedical monitoring. Predictive algorithms for patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (e.g., Triage-HF Plus by Medtronic or HeartLogic by Boston Scientific) were developed to identify patients at significantly increased risk of HF events. However, randomized control trial-based data are heterogeneous regarding the advantages of telemedical monitoring in HF patients. The likelihood of adverse clinical outcomes increases when pulmonary artery pressure (PAP) rises, usually days to weeks before clinical manifestations of HF. A wireless monitoring system (CardioMEMS™) detecting changes in PAP was proposed for HF patients. CardioMEMS™ transmits data to the healthcare provider and allows to institute timely intensification of HF therapies. CardioMEMS™-guided pharmacotherapy reduced a risk of HF-related hospitalization (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.72; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.60–0–0.85; p < 0.01).

Summary

Relevant developments and innovations of telemedical care may improve clinical outcomes among HF patients. The use of CardioMEMS™ was found to be safe and cost-effective by reducing the rates of HF hospitalizations.

Cardiovascular implantable electronic devices in hemodialysis patients: an updated review

Cardiovascular diseases are the leading life-threatening complications in hemodialysis patients. In this scenario, both tachy-arrhythmias and brady-arrhythmias are involved with related hemodialysis and nonhemodialysis-dependent mechanisms; moreover, those arrhythmias usually occur in different time intervals before sudden cardiac death (SCD). Furthermore, current evidence shows that the presence of advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) reduces the benefits of implantable cardioverter--defibrillators (ICDs), which increases the risk of both arrhythmic and nonarrhythmic death, especially in patients with advanced stages of heart failure. Notably, patients with advanced CKD show a more severe degree of heart failure compared with mild CKD patients. However, the benefits of the ICD implantation in the primary prevention of hemodialysis patients is still controversial, and by now, no significant benefits have emerged compared with nonhemodialysis-dependent CKD patients. In secondary prevention, hemodialysis patients with ICD implantation have higher mortality rates compared with nonhemodialysis-dependent CKD patients with ICD. On the other hand, most articles include hemodialysis patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction, neglecting those with preserved systolic function. This review focuses on the epidemiology of SCD in the setting of hemodialysis and the current evidence on ICD implantation in patients on hemodialysis therapy analyzing novel strategies, which might reduce the risk of ICD placing.

Digital literacy as a potential barrier to implementation of cardiology tele-visits after COVID-19 pandemic: the INFO-COVID survey

BACKGROUND

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the implementation of telemedicine has represented a new potential option for outpatient care. The aim of our study was to evaluate digital literacy among cardiology outpatients.

METHODS

From March to June 2020, a survey on telehealth among cardiology outpatients was performed. Digital literacy was investigated through six main domains: age; sex; educational level; internet access; availability of internet sources; knowledge and use of teleconference software programs.

RESULTS

The study included 1067 patients, median age 70 years, 41.3% females. The majority of the patients (58.0%) had a secondary school degree, but among patients aged ≥ 75 years old the most represented educational level was primary school or none. Overall, for internet access, there was a splitting between "never" (42.1%) and "every day" (41.0%), while only 2.7% answered "at least 1/month" and 14.2% "at least 1/week". In the total population, the most used devices for internet access were smartphones (59.0%), and WhatsApp represented the most used app (57.3%). Internet users were younger compared to non-internet users (63 vs. 78 years old, respectively) and with a higher educational level. Age and educational level were associated with non-use of internet (age-per 10-year increase odds ratio (OR) = 3.07, 95% CI: 2.54-3.71, secondary school OR = 0.18, 95% CI: 0.12-0.26, university OR = 0.05, 95% CI: 0.02-0.10).

CONCLUSIONS

Telemedicine represents an appealing option to implement medical practice, and for its development it is important to address the gaps in patients' digital skills, with age and educational level being key factors in this setting.

Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Remote Monitoring of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices in Italy: Results of a Survey Promoted by AIAC (Italian Association of Arrhythmology and Cardiac Pacing)

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a profound impact on the organisation of health care in Italy, with an acceleration in the development of telemedicine. To assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the spread of remote monitoring (RM) of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) in Italy, a survey addressed to cardiologists operating in all Italian CIED-implanting centres was launched. A total of 127 cardiologists from 116 Italian arrhythmia centres took part in the survey, 41.0% of all 283 CIED-implanting centres operating in Italy in 2019. All participating centres declared to use RM of CIEDs. COVID-19 pandemic resulted in an increase in the use of RM in 83 (71.6%) participating centres. In a temporal perspective, an increase in the median number of patients per centre followed up by RM was found from 2012 to 2017, followed by an exponential increase from 2017 to 2020. In 36 participating centres (31.0%) a telehealth visits service was activated as a replacement for in-person outpatient visits (in patients with or without CIED) during the COVID-19 pandemic. COVID-19 pandemic has caused an acceleration in the use of RM of CIEDs and in the use of telemedicine in the clinical practice of cardiology.

Organizational Models for Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Remote Monitoring: Current and Future Directions

This review provides an overview of the literature on the organization, staffing, and structure of remote monitoring (RM) clinics, primarily from countries in Western Europe and United States, as well as the challenges, considerations, and future directions for RM clinic models of care. Using a current case example of an RM clinic in the Midwestern United States, this document provides key information from the viewpoint of a clinic undergoing a shift in workflow. Finally, this review distills key considerations for RM management for electrophysiology clinics, vendors and industry, and policy makers.

Multiparametric Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Algorithm for Heart Failure Risk Stratification and Management: An Analysis in Clinical Practice

BACKGROUND

The HeartLogic algorithm combines multiple implantable cardioverter-defibrillator sensors to identify patients at risk of heart failure (HF) events. We sought to evaluate the risk stratification ability of this algorithm in clinical practice. We also analyzed the alert management strategies adopted in the study group and their association with the occurrence of HF events.

METHODS

The HeartLogic feature was activated in 366 implantable cardioverter-defibrillator and cardiac resynchronization therapy implantable cardioverter-defibrillator patients at 22 centers. The median follow-up was 11 months [25th-75th percentile: 6-16]. The HeartLogic algorithm calculates a daily HF index and identifies periods IN alert state on the basis of a configurable threshold.

RESULTS

The HeartLogic index crossed the threshold value 273 times (0.76 alerts/patient-year) in 150 patients. The time IN alert state was 11% of the total observation period. Patients experienced 36 HF hospitalizations, and 8 patients died of HF during the observation period. Thirty-five events were associated with the IN alert state (0.92 events/patient-year versus 0.03 events/patient-year in the OUT of alert state). The hazard ratio in the IN/OUT of alert state comparison was (hazard ratio, 24.53 [95% CI, 8.55-70.38], P<0.001), after adjustment for baseline clinical confounders. Alerts followed by clinical actions were associated with less HF events (hazard ratio, 0.37 [95% CI, 0.14-0.99], P=0.047). No differences in event rates were observed between in-office and remote alert management.

CONCLUSIONS

This multiparametric algorithm identifies patients during periods of significantly increased risk of HF events. The rate of HF events seemed lower when clinical actions were undertaken in response to alerts. Extra in-office visits did not seem to be required to effectively manage HeartLogic alerts.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02275637.

Scheduled versus alert transmissions for remote follow-up of cardiac implantable electronic devices: Clinical relevance and resource consumption

BACKGROUND

The remote follow-up of pacemakers and implantable cardiac defibrillators (ICDs) usually includes scheduled checks and alert transmissions. However, this results in a high volume of remote data reviews to be managed. We measured the relative contribution of scheduled and alert transmissions to the detection of relevant conditions, and the workload generated by their management.

METHODS

At our center, the frequency of remote scheduled transmissions is 4/year. Moreover, all system-integrity and clinical alerts are turned on for wireless notification. We calculated the number of transmissions received from January to December 2020, and identified transmissions that necessitated in-hospital access for further assessment and transmissions that required clinical discussion with the physician. For all alert transmissions, we identified whether the alert was clinically meaningful (i.e. center was not previously aware of the condition and no action had yet been taken to treat it).

RESULTS

Of 8545 transmissions received from 1697 pacemakers and ICDs, 5766 (67%) were scheduled and 2779 (33%) were alert transmissions received from 764 patients (45%); 499 (9%) scheduled transmissions required clinical discussion with the physician, but only 2 of these necessitated in-hospital visits for further assessment. Of the alert transmissions, 664 (24%) required clinical discussion, and 75 (3%) necessitated in-hospital visits. The proportion of alerts judged clinically meaningful was 7%.

CONCLUSION

Scheduled transmissions generate 67% of remote data reviews for pacemakers and ICDs, but their ability to detect clinically relevant events is very low. A strategy that relies exclusively on alert transmissions could ensure continuity of patient monitoring while reducing the workload at the center.

Remote monitoring and telemedicine in heart failure: implementation and benefits

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Remote 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 FINDINGS

Device-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.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the clinical activities related to arrhythmias and electrophysiology in Italy: results of a survey promoted by AIAC (Italian Association of Arrhythmology and Cardiac Pacing)

COVID-19 outbreak had a major impact on the organization of care in Italy, and a survey to evaluate provision of for arrhythmia during COVID-19 outbreak (March-April 2020) was launched. A total of 104 physicians from 84 Italian arrhythmia centres took part in the survey. The vast majority of participating centres (95.2%) reported a significant reduction in the number of elective pacemaker implantations during the outbreak period compared to the corresponding two months of year 2019 (50.0% of centres reported a reduction of > 50%). Similarly, 92.9% of participating centres reported a significant reduction in the number of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantations for primary prevention, and 72.6% a significant reduction of ICD implantations for secondary prevention (> 50% in 65.5 and 44.0% of the centres, respectively). The majority of participating centres (77.4%) reported a significant reduction in the number of elective ablations (> 50% in 65.5% of the centres). Also the interventional procedures performed in an emergency setting, as well as acute management of atrial fibrillation had a marked reduction, thus leading to the conclusion that the impact of COVID-19 was disrupting the entire organization of health care, with a massive impact on the activities and procedures related to arrhythmia management in Italy.

Prospective evaluation of the multisensor HeartLogic algorithm for heart failure monitoring

Background

The HeartLogic algorithm measures data from multiple implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator‐based sensors and combines them into a single index. The associated alert has proved to be a sensitive and timely predictor of impending heart failure (HF) decompensation.

Hypothesis

We describe a multicenter experience of remote HF management by means of HeartLogic and appraise the value of an alert‐based follow‐up strategy.

Methods

The alert was activated in 104 patients. All patients were followed up according to a standardized protocol that included remote data reviews and patient phone contacts every month and at the time of alerts. In‐office examinations were performed every 6 months or when deemed necessary.

Results

During a median follow‐up of 13 (10–16) months, the overall number of HF hospitalizations was 16 (rate 0.15 hospitalizations/patient‐year) and 100 alerts were reported in 53 patients. Sixty alerts were judged clinically meaningful, and were associated with multiple HF‐related conditions. In 48 of the 60 alerts, the clinician was not previously aware of the condition. Of these 48 alerts, 43 triggered clinical actions. The rate of alerts judged nonclinically meaningful was 0.37/patient‐year, and the rate of hospitalizations not associated with an alert was 0.05/patient‐year. Centers performed remote follow‐up assessments of 1113 scheduled monthly transmissions (10.3/patient‐year) and 100 alerts (0.93/patient‐year). Monthly remote data review allowed to detect 11 (1%) HF events requiring clinical actions (vs 43% actionable alerts, P < .001).

Conclusions

HeartLogic allowed relevant HF‐related clinical conditions to be identified remotely and enabled effective clinical actions to be taken; the rates of unexplained alerts and undetected HF events were low. An alert‐based management strategy seemed more efficient than a scheduled monthly remote follow‐up scheme.