Pacemaker reprogramming rarely needed after device replacement.
Schrittmacherumprogrammierung nach Geräteaustausch nur selten erforderlich.
Cardiac pacing
Follow-up
Outpatients
Journal
Herz
ISSN: 1615-6692
Titre abrégé: Herz
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 7801231
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Feb 2019
Feb 2019
Historique:
received:
17
05
2017
accepted:
03
09
2017
pubmed:
29
9
2017
medline:
8
10
2019
entrez:
29
9
2017
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Most outpatient follow-ups after pacemaker implantation do not involve changes in the device settings. Moreover, the need for pacemaker reprogramming declines with time after implantation. Currently, data on the need for changes in pacemaker set-up after replacement owing to battery depletion are lacking. The aim of this study was to determine the rates of pacemaker reprogramming in this patient group. A retrospective analysis was performed using the files of 217 patients who had undergone pacemaker replacement between 2002 and 2005. The data of 1,407 outpatient follow-up visits between 2002 and 2015 were analyzed. Scheduled and unscheduled visits were marked as visits with "action" or visits "without action", depending on whether pacemaker programming was or was not performed, respectively. Pacemaker programming was performed in only 53 (4%) of the 1,234 scheduled visits and in 44 (25%) of 173 unscheduled visits. Thus, only 97 (7%) of 1,407 visits involved changes in device settings. Of these visits, 446 occurred in the first year after device replacement. The rate of unscheduled visits in the first year was higher (17%) than during the overall period (12%), but the rate of visits involving action was the same: 6% (26 of 446, first year) compared with 7% (97 of 1,407). The vast majority of outpatient visits after pacemaker replacement do not involve subsequent device reprogramming during follow-up. This suggests the potential benefit of remote follow-up for these patients.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Most outpatient follow-ups after pacemaker implantation do not involve changes in the device settings. Moreover, the need for pacemaker reprogramming declines with time after implantation. Currently, data on the need for changes in pacemaker set-up after replacement owing to battery depletion are lacking. The aim of this study was to determine the rates of pacemaker reprogramming in this patient group.
METHODS
METHODS
A retrospective analysis was performed using the files of 217 patients who had undergone pacemaker replacement between 2002 and 2005. The data of 1,407 outpatient follow-up visits between 2002 and 2015 were analyzed. Scheduled and unscheduled visits were marked as visits with "action" or visits "without action", depending on whether pacemaker programming was or was not performed, respectively.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Pacemaker programming was performed in only 53 (4%) of the 1,234 scheduled visits and in 44 (25%) of 173 unscheduled visits. Thus, only 97 (7%) of 1,407 visits involved changes in device settings. Of these visits, 446 occurred in the first year after device replacement. The rate of unscheduled visits in the first year was higher (17%) than during the overall period (12%), but the rate of visits involving action was the same: 6% (26 of 446, first year) compared with 7% (97 of 1,407).
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
The vast majority of outpatient visits after pacemaker replacement do not involve subsequent device reprogramming during follow-up. This suggests the potential benefit of remote follow-up for these patients.
Identifiants
pubmed: 28956076
doi: 10.1007/s00059-017-4627-5
pii: 10.1007/s00059-017-4627-5
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
56-59Subventions
Organisme : Univerzita Karlova v Praze
ID : Q38
Références
Europace. 2011 Dec;13(12):1766-73
pubmed: 21764815
Europace. 2013 Feb;15(2):243-51
pubmed: 23097223
Europace. 2013 Jul;15(7):978-83
pubmed: 23419656
Europace. 2015 Jan;17 Suppl 1:i1-75
pubmed: 25616426