OBJECTIVE: In the SAVE-trial we evaluated the safety, reliability and improvements of patient management using the BIOTRONIK Home Monitoring®-System (HM) in pacemaker (PM) and implanted cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) patients. DESIGN: 115 PM (Module A) and 36 ICD-patients (Module B) were recruited 3 months after implantation. PATIENTS: 65 patients in Module A were randomised to HM-OFF and had one scheduled outpatient clinic follow-up(FU) per year, whereas patients randomised to HM-ON were equipped with the mobile transmitter and discharged without any further scheduled in-office FU. In Module B 18 patients were randomised to HM-OFF and followed by standard outpatient clinic controls every 6 months; 18 patients were randomised to HM-ON receiving remote monitoring plus one outpatient clinic visit per year; unscheduled follow-ups were performed when necessary. RESULTS: The average follow-up period was 17.1 ± 9.2 months in Module A and 26.3 ± 8.6 months in Module B. In both modules, the number of FUs per year was significantly reduced (Module A HM-ON 0.29 ± 0.6 FUs/year vs HM-OFF 0.53 ± 0.5 FUs/year; p b 0.001; Module B HM-ON 0.87 ± 0.25 vs HM-OFF 1.73 ± 0.53 FU/year,p b 0.001). Cost analysis was significantly lower in the HM-ON group compared to the HM-OFF group (18.0 ± 41.3 and 22.4 ± 26.9 € respectively; p b 0.003). 93% of the unscheduled visits in Module B were clinically indicated,whereas 55% of the routine FUs were classified as clinically unnecessary. CONCLUSION: Remote home monitoring of pacemaker and ICD devices was safe, reduced overall hospital visits, and detected events that mandated unscheduled visits.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: In the SAVE-trial we evaluated the safety, reliability and improvements of patient management using the BIOTRONIK Home Monitoring®-System (HM) in pacemaker (PM) and implanted cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) patients. DESIGN: 115 PM (Module A) and 36 ICD-patients (Module B) were recruited 3 months after implantation. PATIENTS: 65 patients in Module A were randomised to HM-OFF and had one scheduled outpatient clinic follow-up(FU) per year, whereas patients randomised to HM-ON were equipped with the mobile transmitter and discharged without any further scheduled in-office FU. In Module B 18 patients were randomised to HM-OFF and followed by standard outpatient clinic controls every 6 months; 18 patients were randomised to HM-ON receiving remote monitoring plus one outpatient clinic visit per year; unscheduled follow-ups were performed when necessary. RESULTS: The average follow-up period was 17.1 ± 9.2 months in Module A and 26.3 ± 8.6 months in Module B. In both modules, the number of FUs per year was significantly reduced (Module A HM-ON 0.29 ± 0.6 FUs/year vs HM-OFF 0.53 ± 0.5 FUs/year; p b 0.001; Module B HM-ON 0.87 ± 0.25 vs HM-OFF 1.73 ± 0.53 FU/year,p b 0.001). Cost analysis was significantly lower in the HM-ON group compared to the HM-OFF group (18.0 ± 41.3 and 22.4 ± 26.9 € respectively; p b 0.003). 93% of the unscheduled visits in Module B were clinically indicated,whereas 55% of the routine FUs were classified as clinically unnecessary. CONCLUSION: Remote home monitoring of pacemaker and ICD devices was safe, reduced overall hospital visits, and detected events that mandated unscheduled visits.
Authors: Antonio López-Villegas; Daniel Catalán-Matamoros; Emilio Robles-Musso; Salvador Peiró Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2015-09-30 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Mateusz Tajstra; Adam Sokal; Arkadiusz Gwóźdź; Marcin Wilczek; Adam Gacek; Konrad Wojciechowski; Elżbieta Gadula-Gacek; Elżbieta Adamowicz-Czoch; Katarzyna Chłosta-Niepiekło; Krzysztof Milewski; Piotr Rozentryt; Zbigniew Kalarus; Mariusz Gąsior; Lech Poloński Journal: Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol Date: 2016-12-25 Impact factor: 1.468
Authors: Ahmad Al-Abdouh; Mohammed Mhanna; Mohammad As Sayaideh; Mahmoud Barbarawi; Waiel Abusnina; Ahmad Jabri; Hossam Alzu'bi; Anan Abu Rmilah; Ikram-Ul Haq; Ashish Kumar; Taha Ahmed; Erin D Michos; Gurukripa N Kowlgi; Abhishek Deshmukh Journal: Curr Heart Fail Rep Date: 2022-10-07
Authors: Remedios López-Liria; Antonio López-Villegas; César Leal-Costa; Salvador Peiró; Emilio Robles-Musso; Rafael Bautista-Mesa; Patricia Rocamora-Pérez; Knut Tore Lappegård; Daniel Catalán-Matamoros Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-02-23 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: James P Hummel; Robert J Leipold; Stacey L Amorosi; Haikun Bao; Kristen A Deger; Paul W Jones; Anuraag R Kansal; Lesli S Ott; Sean Stern; Kenneth Stein; Jeptha P Curtis; Joseph G Akar Journal: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol Date: 2019-04-29