Key result
Centralized remote monitoring identifies institutional outliers in CIED longevity to help mitigate device replacement complications.
Why the study?
While vendor- and model-specific battery life is well characterized for ICDs and pacemakers, whether inter-institutional differences in cardiac implantable electronic device longevity can be efficiently detected remained uncertain.
Does centralized remote monitoring enable the detection of inter-institutional differences in cardiac implantable electronic device longevity?
Does centralized remote monitoring enable the detection of inter-institutional differences in cardiac implantable electronic device longevity?
This paper explores whether centralized remote monitoring can efficiently detect inter-institutional differences and outliers in the battery longevity of cardiac implantable electronic devices.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May support institutional benchmarking of device longevity; leaves open effects on replacement complications.
Each replacement carries a 4–15% risk of major complications including infection, lead malfunction, and pocket revision.1 Extended longevity also reduces costs.2 Vendor- and model-specific longevity is well characterized, with variability in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD)3 and pacemaker5 battery life. Whether inter-institutional differences in device longevity can be efficiently detected remains uncertain.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Evans et al. (2026) studied Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) recipients. Centralized remote monitoring was evaluated on Detection of institutional outliers in cardiac implantable electronic device longevity. Centralized remote monitoring enables detection of institutional outliers in cardiac implantable electronic device longevity, where replacements carry a 4–15% complication risk.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: