Why the study?
Does remote monitoring improve the detection and management of atrial tachyarrhythmias in recipients of dual-chamber pacemakers?
Does remote monitoring improve the detection and management of atrial tachyarrhythmias in recipients of dual-chamber pacemakers?
Remote monitoring in pacemaker patients enables earlier detection and treatment of atrial tachyarrhythmias, resulting in a reduced arrhythmic burden.
Supports routine remote monitoring for earlier ATA intervention in pacemaker patients; extends RCT evidence on proactive arrhythmia management.
BACKGROUND: Remote monitoring (RM) can remotely detect atrial tachyarrhythmias (ATAs). The benefit of RM compared to conventional follow-up in the detection and management of ATA was assessed in recipients of dual-chamber pacemakers. ATA occurrence, burden, and management were analyzed together with adverse clinical events. ATA were detected in 83 patients (28%) in the RM-ON versus 66 (22%) in the RM-OFF group (P = 0.06). The median time between the pacemaker implantation and the first treated ATA was 114 days [44; 241] in the RM-ON versus 224 days [67; 366] in the RM-OFF group (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.56; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.37-0.86; P = 0.01). Therapies for ATA were initiated in 92 patients and the time to treatment of ATA was shortened by 44% in the RM-ON group (HR = 0.565; 95% CI: 0.37-0.86; P = 0.01). Over the last 4 months of follow-up, the mean ATA burden was alleviated by 4 hours/day (18%) in the RM-ON group. The rate of adverse clinical events was similar in both groups. CONCLUSION: Remotely monitored patients were diagnosed and treated earlier for ATA, and subsequently had a lower ATA burden.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Amara et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: