Key result
Implant-based multiparameter remote monitoring cuts death and HF hospitalization by ~17% vs. standard care.
Why the study?
It was unclear whether an implant-based multiparameter remote monitoring strategy to anticipate clinical decompensation improves clinical outcomes in heart failure compared to standard clinical care.
Does an implant-based multiparameter remote monitoring strategy reduce the composite of all-cause death and heart failure hospitalization in patients with heart failure compared to standard clinical care?
Meta-Analysis (n=4,869)
Does an implant-based multiparameter remote monitoring strategy reduce the composite of all-cause death and heart failure hospitalization in patients with heart failure compared to standard clinical care?
Effect estimate: IRR 0.83 (95% CI 0.71-0.99)
Implant-based multiparameter remote monitoring significantly reduces the composite of all-cause mortality and heart failure hospitalizations in patients with heart failure.
Supports multiparameter remote monitoring integration in HF care; confirms composite benefit across 6 RCTs.
BACKGROUND: Several implant-based remote monitoring strategies are currently tested to optimize heart failure (HF) management by anticipating clinical decompensation and preventing hospitalization. Among these solutions, the modern implantable cardioverter-defibrillator and cardiac resynchronization therapy devices have been equipped with sensors allowing continuous monitoring of multiple preclinical markers of worsening HF, including factors of autonomic adaptation, patient activity, and intrathoracic impedance. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to assess whether implant-based multiparameter remote monitoring strategy for guided HF management improves clinical outcomes when compared to standard clinical care. METHODS: A systematic literature research for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing multiparameter-guided HF management versus standard of care was performed on PubMed, Embase, and CENTRAL databases. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) and associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using the Poisson regression model with random study effects. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause death and HF hospitalization events, whereas secondary endpoints included the individual components of the primary outcome. RESULTS: Our meta-analysis included 6 RCTs, amounting to a total of 4869 patients with an average follow-up time of 18 months. Compared with standard clinical management, the multiparameter-guided strategy reduced the risk of the primary composite outcome (IRR 0.83, 95%CI 0.71-0.99), driven by statistically significant effect on both HF hospitalization events (IRR 0.75, 95%CI 0.61-0.93) and all-cause death (IRR 0.80, 95%CI 0.66-0.96). CONCLUSION: Implant-based multiparameter remote monitoring strategy for guided HF management is associated with significant benefit on clinical outcomes compared to standard clinical care, providing a benefit on both hospitalization events and all-cause death.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zito et al. (2023) conducted a meta-analysis in Heart failure (n=4,869). Implant-based multiparameter remote monitoring vs. Standard clinical care was evaluated on Composite of all-cause death and HF hospitalization events (IRR 0.83, 95% CI 0.71-0.99). Implant-based multiparameter remote monitoring significantly reduced the composite risk of all-cause death and heart failure hospitalization compared to standard care (IRR 0.83; 95% CI 0.71-0.99).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: