Literature DB >> 15944090

What is the "optimal" follow-up schedule for ICD patients?

Julia C Senges-Becker1, Martina Klostermann, Ruediger Becker, Alexander Bauer, Karl E Siegler, Hugo A Katus, Wolfgang Schoels.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In the absence of comparative studies, recommended routine follow-up (FU) intervals for implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) patients range from 1 to 6 months; most patients are followed at 3 month intervals.
METHODS: Six hundred and eighteen ICD patients were routinely seen 4 weeks after implant and then every 3 months. Unplanned visits (UPV) were either patient initiated or due to manufacturer recalls. FU visits included patient history/examination, ICD interrogation, pacing/sensing threshold and pacing/shock impedance. Chest X-rays were performed every 6 months. To validate FU interval recommendations, a comparative analysis on the detection of complications was performed, relying either on the information of every, or of every other FU visit, i.e., on 3 or 6 month intervals.
RESULTS: During 3.3+/-2.8 years, 137 complications occurred in 110 patients (17%). However, identification of only 34% was dependent on the FU schedule, since the mode of detection was ICD interrogation in 38 and history/physical examination in nine patients. The remainder was diagnosed by UPV in 47, manufacturer recall in seven, accidental discovery during device replacement in two, and routine X-ray in 34 patients. Complication free survival at 2 years was 86.4% for patients implanted before 1999, and 89.2% thereafter (P=0.003). Regarding 6 rather than 3 month FU intervals, a theoretical maximum delay of 3 months in the detection of potentially life-threatening complications would have occurred in 1.7% of all patients. For those implanted after 1999, this related to only 0.9%.
CONCLUSIONS: ICD-related complications detected during routine FU visits are relatively rare, particularly with newer generation ICD systems. Thus, 6 month FU intervals appear to be safe. With new developments such as patient alert features and telemedical data transmission, FU intervals in ICD clinics might even be further extended.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15944090     DOI: 10.1016/j.eupc.2005.02.117

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Europace        ISSN: 1099-5129            Impact factor:   5.214


  8 in total

1.  Remote monitoring in implantable defibrillator therapy.

Authors:  D A M J Theuns; L S Jordaens
Journal:  Neth Heart J       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 2.380

Review 2.  [ICD lead defects: diagnosis and therapeutical options].

Authors:  Christian G Wollmann; Dirk Böcker; Andreas Löher; Hans H Scheld; Günter Breithardt; Rainer Gradaus
Journal:  Herzschrittmacherther Elektrophysiol       Date:  2009-02-11

Review 3.  [Home Monitoring with implantable ICD--a diagnostic innovation?].

Authors:  W Jung; R Birkemeyer
Journal:  Herzschrittmacherther Elektrophysiol       Date:  2005-09

4.  Cardiac Rhythm Device Threshold Testing Via Pulse Oxymetry.

Authors:  Vladimir Fridman; Cesare Saponieri; Nabil El Sherif; Gioia Turitto
Journal:  J Atr Fibrillation       Date:  2016-04-30

5.  What evidence do we have to replace in-hospital implantable cardioverter defibrillator follow-up?

Authors:  P Brugada
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 5.460

6.  "Home monitoring" for early detection of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator failure: a single-center prospective observational study.

Authors:  Melanie Hauck; Alexander Bauer; Frederik Voss; Slawomir Weretka; Hugo A Katus; Ruediger Becker
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2008-09-05       Impact factor: 5.460

7.  Design of the evolution of management strategies of heart failure patients with implantable defibrillators (EVOLVO) study to assess the ability of remote monitoring to treat and triage patients more effectively.

Authors:  Maurizio Marzegalli; Maurizio Landolina; Maurizio Lunati; Giovanni B Perego; Alessia Pappone; Giuseppe Guenzati; Carlo Campana; Maria Frigerio; Gianfranco Parati; Antonio Curnis; Irene Colangelo; Sergio Valsecchi
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2009-06-18       Impact factor: 2.279

Review 8.  Telemedicine and cardiac implants: what is the benefit?

Authors:  Niraj Varma; Renato Pietro Ricci
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2012-12-04       Impact factor: 29.983

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.