Remote monitoring of cardiac implantable electronic devices using smart device interface versus radiofrequency-based interface: A systematic review

Background

Guidelines recommended remote monitoring (RM) in managing patients with Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices. In recent years, smart device (phone or tablet) monitoring-based RM (SM-RM) was introduced. This study aims to systematically review SM-RM versus bedside monitor RM (BM-RM) using radiofrequency in terms of compliance, connectivity, and episode transmission time.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review, searching three international databases from inception until July 2023 for studies comparing SM-RM (intervention group) versus BM-RM (control group).

Results

Two matched studies (21 978 patients) were retrieved (SM-RM arm: 9642 patients, BM-RM arm: 12 336 patients). There is significantly higher compliance among SM-RM patients compared with BM-RM patients in both pacemaker and defibrillator patients. Manyam et al. found that more SM-RM patients than BM-RM patients transmitted at least once (98.1% vs. 94.3%, p < .001), and Tarakji et al. showed that SM-RM patients have higher success rates of scheduled transmissions than traditional BM-RM methods (SM-RM: 94.6%, pacemaker manual: 56.3%, pacemaker wireless: 77.0%, defibrillator wireless: 87.1%). There were higher enrolment rates, completed scheduled and patient-initiated transmissions, shorter episode transmission time, and higher connectivity among SM-RM patients compared to BM-RM patients. Younger patients (aged <75) had more patient-initiated transmissions, and a higher proportion had ≥10 transmissions compared with older patients (aged ≥75) in both SM-RM and BM-RM groups.

Conclusion

SM-RM is a step in the right direction, with good compliance, connectivity, and shorter episode transmission time, empowering patients to be in control of their health. Further research on cost-effectiveness and long-term clinical outcomes can be carried out.