Key result
Remote monitoring systems reduced the risk of supraventricular arrhythmia-related events compared to conventional follow-up (HR 0.33; 95% CI 0.13-0.82; P=0.017), with no effect on ventricular events.
Why the study?
Does remote monitoring reduce supraventricular and ventricular arrhythmia-related cardiovascular events in patients undergoing ICD implantation or replacement?
Cohort (n=207)
Does remote monitoring reduce supraventricular and ventricular arrhythmia-related cardiovascular events in patients undergoing ICD implantation or replacement?
Hazard Ratio: 0.33 (95% CI 0.13–0.82)
p-value: p=0.017
Remote monitoring in ICD patients significantly reduces supraventricular arrhythmia-related events, such as shocks and hospitalizations, compared to conventional follow-up.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Remote monitoring may reduce events with supraventricular arrhythmias; leaves open need for randomized confirmation in ICD cohorts.
Marcantoni et al. (2014) conducted a cohort in Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (n=207). Remote monitoring systems vs. Conventional follow-up was evaluated on Supraventricular arrhythmia-related cardiovascular events (ICD shocks and/or hospitalizations) (HR 0.33, 95% CI 0.13-0.82, p=0.017). Remote monitoring systems reduced the risk of supraventricular arrhythmia-related events compared to conventional follow-up (HR 0.33; 95% CI 0.13-0.82; P=0.017), with no effect on ventricular events.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: