Implant evaluation of an insertable cardiac monitor outside the electrophysiology lab setting

PLoS One. 2013 Aug 15;8(8):e71544. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0071544. eCollection 2013.

Abstract

Background: To date, insertable cardiac monitors (ICM) have been implanted in the hospital without critical evaluation of other potential settings. Providing alternatives to in-hospital insertion may increase access to ICM, decrease waiting times for patients awaiting diagnosis, and reduce hospital resources.

Methods: This was a prospective, non-randomized, clinical trial involving nine clinical sites throughout the United States designed to assess the feasibility of ICM implants in a non-hospital setting. Other than the Reveal® ICM, implant supplies and techniques were left to physician discretion in patients who met indications. Patients were followed up to 90 days post-implant. The primary objective was to characterize the number of procedure-related adverse events that required surgical intervention within 90 days.

Results: Sixty-five patients were implanted at nine out-of-hospital sites. The insertion procedure was well tolerated by all patients. There were no deaths, systemic infections or endocarditis. There were two (3%) procedure-related adverse events requiring device explant and four (6%) adverse events not requiring explant. ICM use led to 16 diagnoses (24.6%) with 9 patients proceeding to alternate cardiac device implants during the course of the 90-day follow up.

Conclusion: Out-of-hospital ICM insertion can be accomplished with comparable procedural safety and represents a reasonable alternative to the in-hospital setting. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01168427.

Publication types

  • Clinical Trial
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Adult
  • Aged
  • Aged, 80 and over
  • Demography
  • Electrodes, Implanted*
  • Electrophysiological Phenomena*
  • Electrophysiology / instrumentation*
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Young Adult

Associated data

  • ClinicalTrials.gov/NCT01168427

Grants and funding

Funding for this research was provided by Medtronic, Inc., Mounds View, Minnesota, USA. Medtronic’s Cardiac Rhythm and Disease Management (CRDM) clinical department ran the multi-center clinical trial that was used to develop this manuscript. Medtronic provided the statistician and database management for the execution of the trial. Medtronic facilitated the advisory panel in the development of the trial and provided guidance for the manuscript preparation and submission process. Medtronic will also assist with any publication fees incurred. The funder had a role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.