AIMS: Recently, the remote transmission of data detected by implantable loop recorders (ILRs) has become available. The aim of this study was to evaluate effectiveness and acceptance of remote monitoring in the clinical management of syncope and palpitations in patients with ILR. METHODS AND RESULTS: Consecutive patients implanted with ILR (Reveal DX/XT Medtronic, Inc.) and followed up by means of remote monitoring (CareLink(®)) were included. The patients were requested to transmit the data stored in the ILR every week, via the CareLink system, or more frequently during the first period. Patient acceptance of ILR was evaluated by means of a questionnaire concerning physical and mental components. Forty-seven patients (27 males, average age 64 ± 19 years) were enrolled and followed up for 20 ± 13 weeks. Thirty-two patients (68%) had at least one ECG recording of a true relevant event. The mean time from ILR implantation to the first true relevant ECG was 28 ± 49 days, which was 71 ± 17 days less than in the clinical practice of 3-monthly in-office follow-up examinations. Thirty-eight patients (81%) had at least one false arrhythmic event, mainly false asystole and false fast ventricular tachycardia. In the absence of Carelink transmission, at least one episode of memory saturation of ILR would have occurred in 21 patients (45%) that would have limited the diagnostic yield. Patient compliance was good even though one-fifth had some minor psychological concern regarding the ILR implant. CareLink was well accepted and judged easy to use. CONCLUSION: Remote monitoring enhances the diagnostic effectiveness of Reveal, limiting the risk of memory saturation due to the high number of false detections and reducing the time to diagnosis. Both ILR and CareLink were well accepted and well tolerated by the patients, as they were considered useful.
AIMS: Recently, the remote transmission of data detected by implantable loop recorders (ILRs) has become available. The aim of this study was to evaluate effectiveness and acceptance of remote monitoring in the clinical management of syncope and palpitations in patients with ILR. METHODS AND RESULTS: Consecutive patients implanted with ILR (Reveal DX/XT Medtronic, Inc.) and followed up by means of remote monitoring (CareLink(®)) were included. The patients were requested to transmit the data stored in the ILR every week, via the CareLink system, or more frequently during the first period. Patient acceptance of ILR was evaluated by means of a questionnaire concerning physical and mental components. Forty-seven patients (27 males, average age 64 ± 19 years) were enrolled and followed up for 20 ± 13 weeks. Thirty-two patients (68%) had at least one ECG recording of a true relevant event. The mean time from ILR implantation to the first true relevant ECG was 28 ± 49 days, which was 71 ± 17 days less than in the clinical practice of 3-monthly in-office follow-up examinations. Thirty-eight patients (81%) had at least one false arrhythmic event, mainly false asystole and false fast ventricular tachycardia. In the absence of Carelink transmission, at least one episode of memory saturation of ILR would have occurred in 21 patients (45%) that would have limited the diagnostic yield. Patient compliance was good even though one-fifth had some minor psychological concern regarding the ILR implant. CareLink was well accepted and judged easy to use. CONCLUSION: Remote monitoring enhances the diagnostic effectiveness of Reveal, limiting the risk of memory saturation due to the high number of false detections and reducing the time to diagnosis. Both ILR and CareLink were well accepted and well tolerated by the patients, as they were considered useful.