Efficacy and safety of automatic remote monitoring for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator follow-up: The lumos-t safely reduces routine office device follow-up (TRUST) trial

Niraj Varma, Andrew E. Epstein, Anand Irimpen, Robert Schweikert, Charles Love

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Background-: Monitoring implantable cardiac device function and patient condition is important. The Lumos-T Safely Reduces Routine Office Device Follow-Up (TRUST) trial tested the hypothesis that remote home monitoring with automatic daily surveillance (HM) is safe and effective for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator follow-up for 1 year and enables rapid physician evaluation of significant events. Methods and results-: In total, 1339 patients were randomized 2:1 to HM or conventional follow-up. Follow-up checks occurred at 3, 6, 9, 12, and 15 months after implantation. HM was used before office visits at 3 and 15 months in the HM group. At 6, 9, and 12 months, HM only was used but was followed by office visits if necessary. Conventional patients were evaluated with office visits only. Scheduled office visits and unscheduled evaluations, incidence of morbidity, and time elapsed from first event occurrence in each patient to physician evaluation were tracked for each group. HM and conventional patients were similar (age, 63.3±12.8 versus 64.0±12.1 years; gender, 72.0% versus 73.1% male; New York Heart Association class II, 55.9% versus 60.4%; pathology: left ventricular ejection fraction, 29.0±10.7% versus 28.5±9.8%; coronary artery disease, 64.8% versus 71.7%; primary prevention indication, 72.2% versus 73.8%; and dual-chamber implants, 57.8% versus 56.6%). HM reduced total in-hospital device evaluations by 45% without affecting morbidity. In the HM group, 85.8% of all 6-, 9-, and 12-month follow-ups were performed remotely only, indicating that HM provided sufficient assessment in the majority. Median time to evaluation was <2 days in the HM group compared with 36 days in the conventional group (P<0.001) for all arrhythmic events. Conclusions-: HM is safe and allows more rapid detection of actionable events compared with conventional monitoring in patients with implantable electronic cardiac devices.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)325-332
Number of pages8
JournalCirculation
Volume122
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 27 2010

Keywords

  • artificial
  • defibrillators
  • follow-up
  • pacemaker
  • patient monitoring
  • remote monitoring

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Physiology (medical)

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Efficacy and safety of automatic remote monitoring for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator follow-up: The lumos-t safely reduces routine office device follow-up (TRUST) trial'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this