CRT implantation after transvenous lead/device extraction (TLE) in a patient with COVID-19: Endocarditis triggered by syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-COV-2) infection? A case report.

In the era of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the management of cardiac implantable electronic devices infections with concomitant viral infection has not been completely defined yet. In this explorable context, we report the first experience of a Cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillator (CRT-D) implantation after transvenous lead extraction for endocarditis in a COVID-19 patient. We describe both the measures and procedures implemented to reduce the cross-infection in the operating room and our clinical practice to improving procedure effectiveness on patient care.

The usefulness of telemedicine devices in patients with severe heart failure with an implanted cardiac resynchronization therapy system during two years of observation.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure (HF) remains a disease with a poor prognosis. Telemonitoring is a medical service aimed at remote monitoring of patients. AIM: The study aimed to identify the clinical relevance of non-invasive telemonitoring devices in HF patients. METHODS: Sixty patients aged 66.1 (11) years, with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 26.3 (6.8)% underwent cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) implantation. They were randomly allocated to the control (standard medical care) or study (standard medical care + telemonitoring device) groups. During the follow-up (24 months), the patients in the study group provided body mass and blood pressure, along with electrocardiogram on a daily basis. The data were transferred to themonitoring center and consulted with a cardiologist. Transthoracic echocardiography and a 6-minute walk test were performed before and 24 months after CRT implantation. RESULTS: During the two-year observation, the composite endpoint (death or HF hospitalization) occurred in 21 patients, more often in the control group (46.8% vs. 21.4%; P = 0.026). Inunivariate analysis: the use of telemetry (hazard ratio [HR], 0.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.07-0.7; P=0.004), thepresence of coronary heart disease (HR, 41.4; 95% CI, 3.1-567.7; P=0.005), hypertension (HR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.07-0.90; P = 0.035), and patient's body mass (HR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.14-0.92; P = 0.03) were related to the occurrence of the composite endpoint. CONCLUSIONS: The use of a telemonitoring device in CRT recipients improved theprognosis in2-year observation and contributed to the reduction of HF hospitalization.

Immediate and long-term effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown on physical activity in patients with implanted cardiac devices.

BACKGROUND: Physical activity (PA) is an important determinant of cardiovascular health that may be affected the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, we examined the immediate and long-term effects of the pandemic and lockdown on PA in patients with established cardiovascular risk. METHODS: Objectively-measured daily PA data was obtained from cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) from 3453 U.S patients (mean and standard deviations [SD] age, 72.65 [13.24] years; 42% women). Adjusted mixed-effects models stratified by device type were used to compare daily PA from periods in 2020: pre-lockdown (March 1-14), lockdown (March 15 to May 8), and the reopening phase of the pandemic (May 9 to December 31) versus 2019. Patient characteristics and events associated with inactivity during lockdown and the proportion of patients who returned to their 2019 PA-level by the end of reopening phase (December 31, 2020) were examined. RESULTS: Daily PA was significantly lower during the lockdown compared to the same period in 2019 (-15%; p < .0001), especially for pacemaker patients, adults aged <65, and patients more active prior to lockdown. Non-COVID hospitalization and ICD shock were similarly associated with low PA during lockdown (p = .0001). In the reopening phase of the pandemic, PA remained 14.4% lower in the overall sample and only 23% of patients returned to their 2019 PA level by the end of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: In this large cohort of patients with CIEDs, PA was markedly lower during the lockdown and remained lower for months after restrictions were lifted. Strategies to maintain PA during a national emergency are urgently needed.

Advances in cardiac resynchronization and implantable cardioverter/defibrillator therapy: Medtronic Cobalt and Crome.

Cardiovascular implantable electronic devices have revolutionized the management of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. New device generations tend to be launched every few years, with incremental improvements in performance and safety and with an expectation that these will improve patient management and outcomes while remaining cost-effective. As a result, today's cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) and implantable cardioverter defibrillator devices are quite different from the pioneering but often bulky devices of the late 20th century. This review discusses new and improved features developed to target specific needs in managing heart failure patients, some of which are especially pertinent to the current worldwide healthcare situation, with focus on the latest generation of CRTs with defibrillator (CRT-Ds) and implantable cardioverter defibrillators from Medtronic.

Lay abstract Cardiac pacemaker devices, especially those that can retune the pumping function of the heart (known as resynchronization therapy) and those that provide shocks to restore a normal heart rhythm (known as implantable defibrillators) have revolutionized the management of heart failure over the last three decades and continue to improve in terms of their safety, effectiveness and battery life. This review discusses new and improved features developed to target specific needs in managing heart failure patients, specifically focusing on the latest generation of devices from Medtronic.

Telephone follow-up of patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic: early results.

BACKGROUND: In the midst of the SARS­CoV­2 pandemic, basic healthcare challenges arise as lockdowns and social isolation are implemented to prevent the spread of the virus. In order to overcome these challenges, the Polish National Health Fund has facilitated telemedical consultations. AIMS: The aim of this study was to compare teleconsultations with regular visits at ambulatory clinic of implantable devices and to assess whether teleconsultations would be an adequate replacement during times of limited face­to­face contact. METHODS: Teleconsultations in the clinic were introduced for patients without the possibility of remote control of cardiac implantable electronic devices. Prior to planned visits, physicians phoned patients and interviewed them about their health. Further treatment decisions were made based on the interview and available medical records. RESULTS: Teleconsultations were carried out over 3.5 weeks (March 13 to April 1, 2020). Out of 400 patients who had visits planned at the clinic, 349 were consulted by phone. A total of 299 patients confirmed stable health status, 14 reported some symptoms, and 4 were hospitalized; 2 patients changed their primary clinic and were no longer under our care, 1 was undergoing quarantine, 15 required additional intervention, and 15 had died prior to contact. In general, patients gave positive feedback on their teleconsultations. CONCLUSIONS: Teleconsultations are a much­needed option during the SARS­CoV­2 pandemic. They are an effective way to decrease interpersonal contact and to overcome sudden changes to the ambulatory visit plan, which may otherwise put an overwhelming burden on the clinic.

Impact of COVID-19 lockdown in patients with implantable cardioverter and cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators: insights from daily remote monitoring transmissions.

In Italy, a strict lockdown was imposed from 8 March 2020 to stop the spread of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We explored the effect of this lockdown on data transmitted by remote monitoring (RM) of implantable cardioverter and cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators (ICDs/CRT-Ds). RM daily transmissions from ICDs and CRT-Ds were analyzed and compared in two consecutive 1 month frames pre and post-lockdown: period I (7 February-7 March 2020) and period II (8 March-7 April 2020). The study cohort included 180 patients (81.1% male, 63.3% ICDs and 36.7% CRT-Ds) with a median age of 70 (interquartile range 62-78) years. The median value of physical activity provided by accelerometric sensors showed a significant reduction between period I and II [13.1% (8.2-18.1%) versus 9.4% (6.3-13.8%), p < 0.001]. Eighty nine % of patients decreased their activity, for 43.3% the relative reduction was ≥ 25%. The mean heart rate decreased significantly [69.2 (63.8-75.6) bpm vs 67.9 (62.7-75.3) bpm, p < 0.001], but with greater reduction (≈3 beats/minute) in patients aged < 70 years. Resting heart rate and thoracic impedance showed minor variations. No differences were observed in device pacing % and arrhythmias. In cardiac patients, the lockdown imposed to contain COVID-19 outbreak significantly reduced the amount of physical activity and the mean heart rate. These side effects of in-home confinement quarantine should be taken in consideration for frail patients.

Challenges in activation of remote monitoring in patients with cardiac rhythm devices during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Remote monitoring (RM) technology embedded in cardiac rhythm devices permits continuous monitoring of device function, and recording of selected cardiac physiological parameters and cardiac arrhythmias and may be of utmost utility during Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, when in-person office visit for regular follow-up were postponed. However, patients not alredy followed-up via RM represent a challenging group of patients to be managed during the lockdown. METHODS: We reviewed patient files scheduled for an outpatient visit between January 1, 2020 and May 11th, 2020 to assess the proportion of patients in whom RM activation was possible without office visit, and compared them to those scheduled for visit before the lockdown. RESULTS: During COVID-19 pandemic, RM activation was feasible in a minority of patients (7.8% of patients) expected at outpatient clinic for a follow-up visit and device check-up. This was possible in a good proportion of complex implantable devices such as cardiac resynchronization therapy and implantable cardioverter defibrillator but only in a minority of patients with a pacemaker the RM function could be activated during the period of restricted access to hospital. CONCLUSIONS: Our experience strongly suggest to consider the systematic activation of RM function at the time of implantation or - by default programming - in all cardiac rhythm management devices.