Why the study?
Remote monitoring of cardiac implantable electronic devices has increased substantially with evidence supporting its benefits and acceptance, prompting the need for clinical management recommendations.
Provides Delphi consensus recommendations for the management of clinical issues detected through remote monitoring of cardiac implantable electronic devices.
Should prompt integration of remote CIED monitoring into routine practice; extends prior guidelines with structured Delphi consensus on management.
Remote monitoring (RM) of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) has increased substantially in recent years in line with an expanding evidence base as well as the normalization of telehealth and virtual care for health services.1 Clinical trials have demonstrated the benefits of RM in improving clinical outcomes2–5 and also shown RM to be highly acceptable to patients and staff.6,7 Several cardiac organizations, including the Heart Rhythm Society,1 European Heart Rhythm Association,1 and the Cardiac Society of Australia and New Zealand (CSANZ)8,9 recommend offering all patients RM where feasible.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sheahen et al. (2025) studied Patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices. Remote monitoring was evaluated. Remote monitoring of cardiac implantable electronic devices is recommended for all patients where feasible based on a Delphi consensus process.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: