Remote monitoring of devices boosted survival

SAN FRANCISCO – Patients with implantable pacemakers and defibrillators who engage in remote monitoring at more than 75% adherence rates have a 2.4-fold higher rate of survival than those who do not engage in remote monitoring, based on data from 262,574 patients.

"All patients should be enrolled in remote monitoring and [be] encouraged to engage with remote monitoring at a high level, because the mortality reductions associated with remote monitoring are of a very significant and sizeable proportion," Dr. Suneet Mittal said during a press briefing at the annual scientific sessions of the Heart Rhythm Society.

Most patients who undergo device implantation in the United States "are not enrolled in a remote monitoring program, or, if enrolled in a monitoring program, do not reliably engage in remote monitoring," said Dr. Mittal, director of electrophysiology for Valley Health System of New York and New Jersey, Ridgewood, New Jersey. "This is concerning, because one prior study looking at individuals who underwent remote monitoring of their defibrillators suggest a nearly 50% reduction in mortality in the group of patients who were using remote monitoring [Circulation 2010;122[23]:2359-67]."

In a first-of-its-kind study, Dr. Mittal and his associates set out to determine whether this association also applied to pacemaker patients, whether there was a relationship between the amount of remote monitoring of patient use and their ultimate outcome, and whether there were any variables that could be used to identify patients who were or were not using remote monitoring. The population included 262,574 patients with a mean age of 71 years who received implantable pacemakers, cardiac resynchronization therapy pacemakers (CRT-Ps), cardiac resynchronization therapy cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs), and cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators (CRT-Ds). The majority were implanted with a St. Jude Medical pacemaker (112,692), CRT-P (7,704), ICD (82,621), or CRT-D (59,547). Nearly two-thirds of the patients (65%) were men.

Patients who adhered to remote monitoring more than 75% of the time had a 2.4-fold higher rate of survival, compared with patients who were never remotely monitored. "Even more importantly, those who were being remotely monitored more than 75% of the time had a 1.5-fold higher survival than patients who were being remotely monitored but were only engaged in remote monitoring less than 75% of the time," Dr. Mittal added. The magnitude of benefit was the same regardless of the type of device that was implanted, "suggesting that this is a device-independent effect."

Dr. Mittal reported that 54% of patients never enrolled in remote monitoring.

The researchers analyzed U.S. Census data including demographics, poverty level, and education level in an effort to identify potential explanatory variables, but "we could not identify any variable that identified whether patients were using remote monitoring or not," Dr. Mittal said. "Somewhat surprisingly, patients living in the highest population density zones in the U.S. were the least likely to be enrolled and using remote monitoring as opposed to those individuals living in the Midwest and the Pacific Northwest."

Dr. Mittal disclosed that he is a consultant to multiple device makers including St. Jude Medical.

[email protected]

On Twitter @dougbrunk

SAN FRANCISCO – Patients with implantable pacemakers and defibrillators who engage in remote monitoring at more than 75% adherence rates have a 2.4-fold higher rate of survival than those who do not engage in remote monitoring, based on data from 262,574 patients.

"All patients should be enrolled in remote monitoring and [be] encouraged to engage with remote monitoring at a high level, because the mortality reductions associated with remote monitoring are of a very significant and sizeable proportion," Dr. Suneet Mittal said during a press briefing at the annual scientific sessions of the Heart Rhythm Society.

Most patients who undergo device implantation in the United States "are not enrolled in a remote monitoring program, or, if enrolled in a monitoring program, do not reliably engage in remote monitoring," said Dr. Mittal, director of electrophysiology for Valley Health System of New York and New Jersey, Ridgewood, New Jersey. "This is concerning, because one prior study looking at individuals who underwent remote monitoring of their defibrillators suggest a nearly 50% reduction in mortality in the group of patients who were using remote monitoring [Circulation 2010;122[23]:2359-67]."

In a first-of-its-kind study, Dr. Mittal and his associates set out to determine whether this association also applied to pacemaker patients, whether there was a relationship between the amount of remote monitoring of patient use and their ultimate outcome, and whether there were any variables that could be used to identify patients who were or were not using remote monitoring. The population included 262,574 patients with a mean age of 71 years who received implantable pacemakers, cardiac resynchronization therapy pacemakers (CRT-Ps), cardiac resynchronization therapy cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs), and cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators (CRT-Ds). The majority were implanted with a St. Jude Medical pacemaker (112,692), CRT-P (7,704), ICD (82,621), or CRT-D (59,547). Nearly two-thirds of the patients (65%) were men.

Patients who adhered to remote monitoring more than 75% of the time had a 2.4-fold higher rate of survival, compared with patients who were never remotely monitored. "Even more importantly, those who were being remotely monitored more than 75% of the time had a 1.5-fold higher survival than patients who were being remotely monitored but were only engaged in remote monitoring less than 75% of the time," Dr. Mittal added. The magnitude of benefit was the same regardless of the type of device that was implanted, "suggesting that this is a device-independent effect."

Dr. Mittal reported that 54% of patients never enrolled in remote monitoring.

The researchers analyzed U.S. Census data including demographics, poverty level, and education level in an effort to identify potential explanatory variables, but "we could not identify any variable that identified whether patients were using remote monitoring or not," Dr. Mittal said. "Somewhat surprisingly, patients living in the highest population density zones in the U.S. were the least likely to be enrolled and using remote monitoring as opposed to those individuals living in the Midwest and the Pacific Northwest."

Dr. Mittal disclosed that he is a consultant to multiple device makers including St. Jude Medical.

[email protected]

On Twitter @dougbrunk

SAN FRANCISCO – Patients with implantable pacemakers and defibrillators who engage in remote monitoring at more than 75% adherence rates have a 2.4-fold higher rate of survival than those who do not engage in remote monitoring, based on data from 262,574 patients.

"All patients should be enrolled in remote monitoring and [be] encouraged to engage with remote monitoring at a high level, because the mortality reductions associated with remote monitoring are of a very significant and sizeable proportion," Dr. Suneet Mittal said during a press briefing at the annual scientific sessions of the Heart Rhythm Society.

Most patients who undergo device implantation in the United States "are not enrolled in a remote monitoring program, or, if enrolled in a monitoring program, do not reliably engage in remote monitoring," said Dr. Mittal, director of electrophysiology for Valley Health System of New York and New Jersey, Ridgewood, New Jersey. "This is concerning, because one prior study looking at individuals who underwent remote monitoring of their defibrillators suggest a nearly 50% reduction in mortality in the group of patients who were using remote monitoring [Circulation 2010;122[23]:2359-67]."

In a first-of-its-kind study, Dr. Mittal and his associates set out to determine whether this association also applied to pacemaker patients, whether there was a relationship between the amount of remote monitoring of patient use and their ultimate outcome, and whether there were any variables that could be used to identify patients who were or were not using remote monitoring. The population included 262,574 patients with a mean age of 71 years who received implantable pacemakers, cardiac resynchronization therapy pacemakers (CRT-Ps), cardiac resynchronization therapy cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs), and cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators (CRT-Ds). The majority were implanted with a St. Jude Medical pacemaker (112,692), CRT-P (7,704), ICD (82,621), or CRT-D (59,547). Nearly two-thirds of the patients (65%) were men.

Patients who adhered to remote monitoring more than 75% of the time had a 2.4-fold higher rate of survival, compared with patients who were never remotely monitored. "Even more importantly, those who were being remotely monitored more than 75% of the time had a 1.5-fold higher survival than patients who were being remotely monitored but were only engaged in remote monitoring less than 75% of the time," Dr. Mittal added. The magnitude of benefit was the same regardless of the type of device that was implanted, "suggesting that this is a device-independent effect."

Dr. Mittal reported that 54% of patients never enrolled in remote monitoring.

The researchers analyzed U.S. Census data including demographics, poverty level, and education level in an effort to identify potential explanatory variables, but "we could not identify any variable that identified whether patients were using remote monitoring or not," Dr. Mittal said. "Somewhat surprisingly, patients living in the highest population density zones in the U.S. were the least likely to be enrolled and using remote monitoring as opposed to those individuals living in the Midwest and the Pacific Northwest."

Dr. Mittal disclosed that he is a consultant to multiple device makers including St. Jude Medical.

[email protected]

On Twitter @dougbrunk