Application value of remote device follow-up system in patients with implanted cardioverter defibrillator and cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator

梁延春,武敏,徐白鸽,许国卿,高阳,王祖禄,韩雅玲,刘荣,于海波
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.cn.113859-20210224-00040
2021-01-01
Abstract:Objective:To evaluate the benefit of remote device follow-up system in patients with implanted cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) and cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator (CRT-D) .Methods:ICD and CRT-D patients enrolled in General Hospital of Northern Theater Command with CareLink remote device follow-up system from January 2017 to December 2020 were selected for in-person evaluation or remote follow-up according to the prescribed time and abnormal clinical events were transmitted at any time. All selected patients were followed up in the clinic at the prescribed time or with the help of CareLink for remote follow-up, and special clinical events were transmitted at any time. The severities of the incidents were divided into red, yellow and white alarm events. The information and alarm data obtained by remote device follow-up system were analyzed, and its early monitoring ability to system-related problems and disease-related events was observed. The effective rate of clinical intervention was judged by the change of event alarm grade within 3 months after the occurrence of the event.Results:One hundred and sixty-five patients were followed up for (779.2±421.2) days, and the percentages of red, yellow, white events and no events in 892 data transmissions were 6.6%, 14.8%, 49.7%, 28.9%, respectively. Remote device follow-up system found clinical events 69 (28-132) days earlier than in-person evaluation. Through remote guidance (86.4%, 548/634) and early clinic following (13.6%, 86/634) , the overall effective rate of event intervention was as high as 97.8% (620/634) , avoiding the recurrence of 91.5% (54/59) red events and 93.2% (123/132) yellow events .Conclusion:Remote device follow-up system can safely and effectively deal with clinical events and reduce unnecessary in-person evaluation in ICD and CRT-D postoperative patients.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?