Abstract
Remote monitoring (RM) receives a Class I: Level of Evidence: A recommendation for the follow-up of patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators, positioning the technology as standard of care. RM is often seen and sold as a plug-and-play technology, whereas fundamental differences exist in the philosophy and conception of the 5 main RM systems. The capabilities and limitations of the different RM systems need to be understood and taken into account when the decision is made to remotely manage an individual patient. The purpose of this review is to provide to the cardiologist practical information about RM systems’ specificities with respect to the different technical and clinical alerts. Clinically based indications and programming suggestions are provided.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 315-328 |
| Number of pages | 14 |
| Journal | JACC: Clinical Electrophysiology |
| Volume | 3 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 1 Apr 2017 |
Keywords
- arrhythmia
- implantable cardioverter-defibrillator
- lead failure
- remote monitoring
- telemedicine
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Optimizing Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Remote Monitoring: A Practical Guide'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver