Why the study?
Are invasive cardiac monitoring and CIED remote monitoring cost-effective compared to in-office follow-up in adult heart failure patients?
Population
19 studies across 11 countries evaluating adult heart failure patients
Comparison
Invasive cardiac monitoring or cardiac… vs In-office follow-up
Design
Systematic_review
Key result
Invasive cardiac monitoring and CIED remote monitoring were cost-effective or cost-saving compared with in-office follow-up across 19 economic evaluation studies.
Authors
Loading...
Both strategies show cost-effectiveness in HF management; reinforces recent guidance and extends evidence across systems.
Are invasive cardiac monitoring and CIED remote monitoring cost-effective compared to in-office follow-up in adult heart failure patients?
Invasive hemodynamic and device-based remote monitoring are economically advantageous for heart failure management across multiple healthcare systems, particularly in high-income settings.
Capodici et al. (2026) conducted a review in chronic heart failure (n=19). Invasive cardiac monitoring and cardiac implantable electronic device remote monitoring vs. In-office follow-up was evaluated on Cost-effectiveness. Invasive cardiac monitoring and CIED remote monitoring were cost-effective or cost-saving compared with in-office follow-up across 19 economic evaluation studies.