Remote monitoring of implantable devices: Should we continue to ignore it?

Abstract

The number of patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) is increasing. In addition to improve survival, ICD can collect data related to device function and physiological parameters. Remote monitoring (RM) of these data allows early detection of technical or clinical problems and a prompt intervention (reprogramming device or therapy adjustment) before the patient require hospitalization. RM is not a substitute for emergency service and its consultation is now limited during working hours. Thus, a consent form is required to inform patients about benefits and limitations. The available studies indicate that remote monitoring is more effective than traditional calendar face to face based encounters. RM is safe, highly reliable, cost efficient, allows quick reply to failures, and reduces the number of scheduled visits and the incidence of inappropriate shocks with a positive impact on survival. It follows that RM has the credentials to be the standard of care for ICD management; however, unfortunately, there is a delay in physician acceptance and implementation. The recent observations from randomized IN-TIME study that showed a clear survival benefit with RM in heart failure patients have encouraged us to review both the negative and positive aspects of RM collected in a little more than a decade.

Keywords: Heart failure; Implantable cardioverter defibrillator; Inappropriate shock; Remote monitoring.