Sitaramesh Emani1. 1. The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, 473. W 12th Ave, Suite 200 DHLRI, Columbus, OH, 43210, USA. Sitaramesh.emani@osumc.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Rehospitalization for heart failure remains a challenge in the treatment of affected patients. The ability to remotely monitor patients for worsening heart failure may provide an avenue through which therapeutic interventions can be made to prevent a rehospitalization. Available data on remote monitoring to reduce heart failure rehospitalizations are reviewed within. RECENT FINDINGS: Strategies to reduce readmissions include clinical telemonitoring, bioimpedance changes, biomarkers, and remote hemodynamic monitoring. Telemonitoring is readily available, but has low sensitivity and adherence. No data exist to demonstrate the efficacy of this strategy in reducing admissions. Bioimpedance offers improved sensitivity compared to telemonitoring, but has not demonstrated an ability to reduce hospitalizations and is currently limited to those patients who have separate indications for an implantable device. Biomarker levels have shown variable results in the ability to reduce hospitalizations and remain without definitive proof supporting their utilization. Remote hemodynamic monitoring has shown the strongest ability to reduce heart failure readmissions and is currently approved for this purpose. However, remote hemodynamic monitoring requires an invasive procedure and may not be cost-effective. All currently available strategies to reduce hospitalizations with remote monitoring have drawbacks and challenges. Remote hemodynamic monitoring is currently the most efficacious based on data, but is not without its own imperfections.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Rehospitalization for heart failure remains a challenge in the treatment of affected patients. The ability to remotely monitor patients for worsening heart failure may provide an avenue through which therapeutic interventions can be made to prevent a rehospitalization. Available data on remote monitoring to reduce heart failure rehospitalizations are reviewed within. RECENT FINDINGS: Strategies to reduce readmissions include clinical telemonitoring, bioimpedance changes, biomarkers, and remote hemodynamic monitoring. Telemonitoring is readily available, but has low sensitivity and adherence. No data exist to demonstrate the efficacy of this strategy in reducing admissions. Bioimpedance offers improved sensitivity compared to telemonitoring, but has not demonstrated an ability to reduce hospitalizations and is currently limited to those patients who have separate indications for an implantable device. Biomarker levels have shown variable results in the ability to reduce hospitalizations and remain without definitive proof supporting their utilization. Remote hemodynamic monitoring has shown the strongest ability to reduce heart failure readmissions and is currently approved for this purpose. However, remote hemodynamic monitoring requires an invasive procedure and may not be cost-effective. All currently available strategies to reduce hospitalizations with remote monitoring have drawbacks and challenges. Remote hemodynamic monitoring is currently the most efficacious based on data, but is not without its own imperfections.
Authors: Philip B Adamson; William T Abraham; Mark Aaron; Juan M Aranda; Robert C Bourge; Andrew Smith; Lynne W Stevenson; Jordan G Bauman; Jay S Yadav Journal: J Card Fail Date: 2011-01 Impact factor: 5.712
Authors: Jay Ritzema; Richard Troughton; Iain Melton; Ian Crozier; Robert Doughty; Henry Krum; Anthony Walton; Philip Adamson; Saibal Kar; Prediman K Shah; Mark Richards; Neal L Eigler; James S Whiting; Garrie J Haas; J Thomas Heywood; Christopher M Frampton; William T Abraham Journal: Circulation Date: 2010-02-22 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: L W Stevenson; J H Tillisch; M Hamilton; M Luu; C Chelimsky-Fallick; J Moriguchi; J Kobashigawa; J Walden Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 1990-12-01 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Tariq Ahmad; Mona Fiuzat; Michael J Pencina; Nancy L Geller; Faiez Zannad; John G F Cleland; James V Snider; Stephan Blankenberg; Kirkwood F Adams; Rita F Redberg; Jae B Kim; Alice Mascette; Robert J Mentz; Christopher M O'Connor; G Michael Felker; James L Januzzi Journal: JACC Heart Fail Date: 2014-06-11 Impact factor: 12.035
Authors: William T Abraham; Philip B Adamson; Robert C Bourge; Mark F Aaron; Maria Rosa Costanzo; Lynne W Stevenson; Warren Strickland; Suresh Neelagaru; Nirav Raval; Steven Krueger; Stanislav Weiner; David Shavelle; Bradley Jeffries; Jay S Yadav Journal: Lancet Date: 2011-02-19 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: G Michael Felker; Tariq Ahmad; Kevin J Anstrom; Kirkwood F Adams; Lawton S Cooper; Justin A Ezekowitz; Mona Fiuzat; Nancy Houston-Miller; James L Januzzi; Eric S Leifer; Daniel B Mark; Patrice Desvigne-Nickens; Gayle Paynter; Ileana L Piña; David J Whellan; Christopher M O'Connor Journal: JACC Heart Fail Date: 2014-09-03 Impact factor: 12.035
Authors: Manuel Gonzalez Garcia; Farhad Fatehi; Nazli Bashi; Marlien Varnfield; Pupalan Iyngkaran; Andrea Driscoll; Christopher Neil; David L Hare; Brian Oldenburg Journal: Clin Med Insights Cardiol Date: 2019-07-10