Remote monitoring of patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators: Can results from large clinical trials be transposed to clinical practice?

SummaryBackgroundRemote monitoring (RM) is increasingly used to follow up patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs). Randomized control trials provide evidence for the benefit of this intervention, but data for RM in daily clinical practice with multiple-brands and unselected patients is lacking.AimsTo assess the effect of RM on patient management and clinical outcome for recipients of ICDs in daily practice.MethodsWe reviewed ICD recipients followed up at our institution in 2009 with RM or with traditional hospital only (HO) follow-up. We looked at the effect of RM on the number of scheduled ambulatory follow-ups and urgent unscheduled consultations, the time between onset of asymptomatic events to clinical intervention and the clinical effectiveness of all consultations. We also evaluated the proportion of RM notifications representing clinically relevant situations.ResultsWe included 355 patients retrospectively (RM: n=144, HO: n=211, 76.9% male, 60.3±15.2years old, 50.1% with ICDs for primary prevention and mean left ventricular ejection fraction 35.5±14.5%). Average follow-up was 13.5months. The RM group required less scheduled ambulatory follow-up consultations (1.8 vs. 2.1/patient/year; P<0.0001) and a far lower median time between the onset of asymptomatic events and clinical intervention (7 vs. 76days; P=0.016). Of the 784 scheduled ambulatory follow-up consultations carried out, only 152 (19.4%) resulted in therapeutic intervention or ICD reprogramming. We also found that the vast majority of RM notifications (61.9%) were of no clinical relevance.ConclusionRM allows early management of asymptomatic events and a reduction in scheduled ambulatory follow-up consultations in daily clinical practice, without compromising safety, endorsing RM as the new standard of care for ICD recipients

Exploring a New Systematic Route for Left Ventricular Pacing in Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

International audienceBackground:Frequency and distribution of left ventricular (LV) venous collaterals were studied in vivo to evaluate the ease and feasibility of implanting a new ultra-thin LV quadripolar microlead for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT).Methods and Results:Evaluable venograms were analyzed to define the prevalence of venous collaterals (>0.5 mm diameter) between: (1) different LV segments; and (2) different major LV veins in: unselected patients who underwent CRT from 2008 to 2012 at Rouen Hospital, France (retrospective); and CRT patients from the Axone Acute pilot study in 2018 (prospective). In prospective patients with evaluable venograms, LV microlead implantation was attempted. Thirty-six (21/65 retrospective, 15/20 prospective) patients had evaluable venograms with ≥1 visible venous collaterals. Collaterals were found between LV veins in all CRT patients with evaluable venograms. Regionally, prevalence was highest between: the apical inferior and apical lateral (42%); and mid inferior and mid inferolateral (42%) segments. Collateral connections were most prevalent between: the inferior interventricular vein (IIV) and lateral vein (64% [23/36]); and IIV and infero-lateral vein (36% [13/36]). Cross-vein microlead implantation was possible in 18 patients (90%), and single-vein implantation was conducted in the other 2 patients (10%).Conclusions:Venous collaterals were found in vivo between LV veins in all CRT patients with evaluable venograms, making this network an option for accessing multiple LV sites using a single LV microlead

Le genre dans l’enseignement supérieur et la recherche. Livre Blanc

Comment le genre est-il actuellement pris en compte dans les enseignements et dans la recherche, en France ? Quelle information et quelle diffusion sont possibles pour les résultats des recherches ? Quelles sont les ressources disponibles pour étendre celles-ci ? Comment les études de genre nourrissent-elles les formations professionnelles, tant initiales que continues ? Conçu par l’Association nationale des études féministes, et rédigé par de nombreuses chercheures avec la collaboration d’auteures issues d’un réseau national, cet ouvrage propose avant tout un état des lieux aussi exhaustif que possible des questions qui traversent les institutions d’enseignement supérieur concernant les rapports et normes de genre. Il comprend des préconisations et interpelle les pouvoirs publics. L’ANEF, à travers ce Livre blanc, aborde les principales questions qui se posent sur la place des études de genre en France, leur conception et leur impact, mais aussi sur la formation des enseignantes et enseignants, les inégalités femmes/hommes et les diverses formes de violences observées dans les établissements d’enseignement supérieur français. L’ANEF, créée en 1989, a pour objectif de développer et promouvoir les enseignements et les recherches féministes dans l’ensemble des disciplines. Elle regroupe des enseignantes, des chercheures, des étudiantes et d’autres personnes impliquées dans les recherches et les enseignements féministes, sur les femmes, le genre, et les rapports sociaux de sexe

Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Lead Extraction First Multicenter French Experience

International audienceObjectives - The aim of this multicenter study was to characterize the efficacy and safety of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (S-ICDs) lead extraction procedures. Background - S-ICDs have been developed to limit lead-related complications inherent to transvenous ICD devices. To date, no study has specifically investigated the safety and feasibility of S-ICD lead extraction procedures. Methods - Patients requiring S-ICD lead extraction between February 1, 2014, and February 28, 2019, were retrospectively included in 10 centers. The primary endpoint of the study was procedural success, defined as the removal of all the lead and lead material from the subcutaneous space. Secondary endpoints included procedural complications and the need for specific extraction tools. Results - S-ICD lead extraction procedures were performed in 32 patients (mean age 45.7 ± 13.8 years, 75.0% men, 65.6% in primary prevention). The median time from S-ICD lead implantation was 9.3 months (5.4 to 17.5 months). The primary endpoint, that is, complete removal of the material, was achieved in 96.9% of the patients, and only 1 procedural failure occurred (3.1%). Simple traction of the S-ICD lead was successful in 19 patients (59.4%), whereas 3 patients (9.4%) needed an additional incision and 9 patients (28.1%) required mechanical sheath to remove lead adhesions around the coil. No procedure-related complications occurred. Patients with successful simple traction extraction were implanted more recently (7.1 months [2.8 to 12.2 months] vs. 16.5 months [7.5 to 20.8 months]; p = 0.04) and had less prior history of sternotomy (2 [10.5%] vs. 5 [38.5%] patients; p = 0.09). Conclusions - S-ICD lead extraction is an efficient and safe procedure, but may require some specific tools like mechanical sheath, specifically when fibrotic adhesions developed around the parasternal coil

FRAGILE: FRench Attitude reGistry in case of ICD LEad replacement

International audienceAimsFRench Attitude reGistry in case of ICD LEad replacement (FRAGILE) registry was set-up to describe the attitude in different French institutions in case of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) lead replacement, extraction, or abandonment and to compare outcomes in both groups.Methods and resultsProspective observational study comparing two attitudes in case of ICD lead replacement, extraction, or abandonment. Primary endpoint describes the attitude in different French centres, collect parameters that may influence the decision. Secondary endpoint compares early and mid-term (2 years) complications in both groups.Between April 2013 and April 2017, 552 patients were included in 32 centres. 434 (78.6%) were male, mean patient’s age was 60.3 ± 14.4 years. In 56.9% of the cases, the decision was to explant the lead. Patients in the extraction group were younger than in the abandonment group (56.7 ± 14.5 vs. 65 ± 12.7 P < 0.0001) and less likely to have comorbidities (46.5% vs. 58.3% of the patients P = 0.022). The mean lead dwelling time was significantly longer in the abandonment group as compared with the extraction group (7.6 ± 3.9 vs. 5.2 ± 3.1 years, P < 0.0001). There was no statistical difference between both groups concerning early and 2 years complications.ConclusionIn this registry, the strategy in case of non-infected ICD lead replacement was mainly influenced by patient’s age and comorbidities and lead dwelling time. No difference was observed in outcomes in both strategies