4.0 Article

Remote monitoring of patients with biventricular defibrillators through the CareLink system improves clinical management of arrhythmias and heart failure episodes

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10840-008-9321-3

关键词

Defibrillator; Cardiac resynchronization therapy; Home monitoring; Remote control; Heart failure; Tachyarrhythmias

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of the present study is to evaluate if remote monitoring with the CareLink Network may improve clinical management of tachyarrhythmias and heart failure episodes in patients treated with biventricular defibrillators (CRT-D). Patients implanted with CRT-D for more than 6 months received the CareLink monitor and were trained to perform device interrogation. At-home transmissions were scheduled at 2 weeks, 1 and 2 months after training, with a final in-office visit after 3 months. Sixty-seven patients performed 264 data transmissions. Twenty-three unscheduled data transmissions were requested by the centers after patient contact. Ventricular tachyarrhythmias were reported in nine patients during 16 data reviews. Thirteen data reviews (81%) were performed remotely via CareLink transmissions (nine scheduled and four unscheduled), in seven patients. Of these events, in two cases (15%) in-hospital visits were requested, while in 11 (85%) no action was needed and no additional in-clinic visits were scheduled. During the study period, in 20/28 (71%) intra-thoracic impedance alerts, the patients remotely transmitted their device data. After remote data review, in ten cases drug therapy was adjusted by phone and in four cases no action was needed and the patient reassured. In six episodes an in-hospital extra visit was scheduled. On the whole, in 14 cases (70%), the patient could be managed remotely avoiding a visit to the hospital. Our study showed that remote follow-up is an efficient method to manage tachyarrhythmias and heart failure episodes in CRT-D patients. Early reaction to clinical events may improve overall patient care.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据