Cookies?
Library Header Image
LSE Research Online LSE Library Services

Remote monitoring of implantable cardiac devices in heart failure patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Alotaibi, Sultan, Hernandez-Montfort, Jaime, Ali, Omar E., El-Chilali, Karim and Perez, Bernardo A. (2020) Remote monitoring of implantable cardiac devices in heart failure patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Heart Failure Reviews, 25 (3). pp. 469-479. ISSN 1382-4147

Full text not available from this repository.
Identification Number: 10.1007/s10741-020-09923-1

Abstract

This study aims to determine whether the use of remote monitoring (RM) in implantable cardiac devices decreases all-cause mortality and heart failure (HF)-related hospitalization. We sought to conduct a systematic review and a meta-analysis of published randomized controlled studies. The population is adult patients with a diagnosis of HF with implantable devices. The intervention is RM using implantable cardiac devices whether added or used alone compared to standard of care. The outcomes are HF-related hospitalization and all-cause mortality. Risk of bias was assessed using the criteria defined in the Revised Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessment of risk of bias. Data were extracted and validity was assessed independently by two reviewers. Electronic databases EMBASE and MEDLINE (Ovid) were searched up to 14th of October 2019, supplemented by a second search in CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) and clinicaltrials.gov. Only randomized controlled studies published in peer-reviewed journals with full format text in English of adult HF patients with a minimum follow-up of 6 months reporting mortality and/or hospitalization. Observational studies and studies that did not meet inclusion criteria were excluded. Thirteen randomized controlled studies that enrolled a total of 7015 patients were identified, 7 of which reported on all-cause mortality only and included 4460 patients. Compared with standard of care, the pooled relative risk (RR) of all-cause mortality and HF-related hospitalization in patients with RM compared to those receiving standard of care was 0.88 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69 to 1.11) and 0.95 (95% CI 0.78–1.16), respectively. In the subgroup analysis, using pulmonary pressure for RM was associated with a decrease in HF-related hospitalization (RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.60–0.88). RM showed benefit in reducing HF-related hospitalization when compared to standard of care only when using pulmonary pressure monitoring.

Item Type: Article
Additional Information: © 2020, Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.
Divisions: Health Policy
Subjects: R Medicine > RA Public aspects of medicine > RA0421 Public health. Hygiene. Preventive Medicine
Date Deposited: 26 Aug 2022 15:21
Last Modified: 29 Feb 2024 05:42
URI: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/id/eprint/116398

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item