Search

Over the past decade, remote monitoring (RM) has become an increasingly popular way to improve healthcare and health outcomes. Modern cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) are capable of recording an increasing amount of data related to CIED function, arrhythmias, physiological status and hemodynamic parameters, providing in-depth and updated information on patient cardiovascular function. The extensive use of RM for patients with CIED allows for early diagnosis and rapid assessment of relevant issues, both clinical and technical, as well as replacing outpatient follow-up improving overall management without compromise safety. This approach is recommended by current guidelines for all eligible patients affected by different chronic cardiac conditions including either brady- and tachy-arrhythmias and heart failure. Beyond to clinical advantages, RM has demonstrated cost-effectiveness and is associated with elevated levels of patient satisfaction. Future perspectives include improving security, interoperability and diagnostic power as well as to engage patients with digital health technology. This review aims to update existing data concerning clinical outcomes in patients managed with RM in the wide spectrum of cardiac arrhythmias and Hear Failure (HF), disclosing also about safety, effectiveness, patient satisfaction and cost-saving.

Background: Conduction system disorders represent a frequent complication in patients undergoing surgical (surgical aortic valve replacement, SAVR) or percutaneous (transcatheter aortic valve implantation, TAVI) aortic valve replacement. The purpose of this survey was to evaluate experienced operators approach in this clinical condition., Methods: This survey was independently conducted by the Italian Association of Arrhythmology and Cardiac Pacing (AIAC) and it consisted of 24 questions regarding the respondents' profile, the characteristics of participating centres, and conduction disease management in different scenarios., Results: Fifty-five physicians from 55 Italian arrhythmia centres took part in the survey. Prophylactic pacemaker implantation is rare. In case of persistent complete atrioventricular block (AVB), 49% and 73% respondents wait less than one week before implanting a definitive pacemaker after SAVR and TAVI, respectively. In case of second degree AVB, the respondents wait some days more for definitive implantation. Respondents consider bundle branch blocks, in particular pre-existing left bundle branch block (LBBB), the worst prognostic factors for pacemaker implantation after TAVI. The implanted valve type is considered a relevant element to evaluate. In patients with new-onset LBBB and severe/moderate left ventricular systolic dysfunction, respondents would implant a biventricular pacemaker in 100/55% of cases, respectively., Conclusions: Waiting time before a definitive pacemaker implantation after aortic valve replacement has reduced compared to the past, and it is anticipated in TAVI vs. SAVR. Bundle branch blocks are considered the worse prognostic factor for pacemaker implantation after TAVI. The type of pacemaker implanted in new-onset LBBB patients without severe left ventricular systolic dysfunction is heterogeneous.

At the beginning of the COVID-19 emergency, non-urgent surgical procedures had to be deferred, but also emergencies were reduced. To assess the global trend of pacemaker (PM) and implantable cardiac-defibrillator (ICD) procedures performed in Italy before, during, and after the first COVID-19 emergency, all the Italian hospital discharge records related to PM/ICD procedures performed between 2012 and 2021, sent to the National Institute of Health, were reviewed. Compared to 2019, in 2020, there was a reduction of first PM implants (52,216 to 43,962, -16%; p < 0.01), but not replacements (16,591 to 17,331, + 4%; p = 0.16). In particular, in April 2020, there was a drop of first implants (- 53,4% vs the average value of April 2018 and April 2019; p < 0.01), while the reduction of replacements was less evident (-32.6%; p = NS). In 2021, PM procedures increased to values similar to the pre-pandemic period. A reduction of ICD procedures was observed in 2020 (22,355, -7% toward 2019), mainly in April 2020 (- 46% vs April 2018/April 2019; p = 0.03). In 2021, the rate of ICD procedures increased (+ 14% toward 2020). A non-significant reduction of "urgent" procedures (complete atrioventricular block for PM and ventricular fibrillation for ICD), even in April 2020, was observed. In 2020, there was a reduction of first PM implants and ICDs, offset by increased activity in 2021. No decrease in PM replacements was observed, and the drop in "urgent" PM and ICD procedures was not statistically significant., (© 2023. The Author(s).)