A randomized trial of long-term remote monitoring of pacemaker recipients (The COMPAS trial)

Professional practice guidelines recommend that pacemaker recipients be followed regularly. However, the majority of scheduled ambulatory visits is unproductive and imposes a heavy burden on the health-care system. The COMPAS randomized, multicentre, non-inferiority trial examined the safety of long...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:European heart journal 2012-05, Vol.33 (9), p.1105-1111
Hauptverfasser: MABO, Philippe, VICTOR, Frederic, BAZIN, Patrick, AHRES, Saïd, BABUTY, Dominique, COSTA, Antoine Da, BINET, Didier, DAUBERT, Jean-Claude
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1111
container_issue 9
container_start_page 1105
container_title European heart journal
container_volume 33
creator MABO, Philippe
VICTOR, Frederic
BAZIN, Patrick
AHRES, Saïd
BABUTY, Dominique
COSTA, Antoine Da
BINET, Didier
DAUBERT, Jean-Claude
description Professional practice guidelines recommend that pacemaker recipients be followed regularly. However, the majority of scheduled ambulatory visits is unproductive and imposes a heavy burden on the health-care system. The COMPAS randomized, multicentre, non-inferiority trial examined the safety of long-term remote monitoring of pacemakers. Between December 2005 and January 2008, 538 patients were randomly assigned to remote monitoring follow-up (active group) vs. standard care (control group). The primary objective was to confirm that the proportion of patients who experienced at least one major adverse event (MAE), including all-cause death and hospitalizations for device-related or cardiovascular adverse events, was not >7% higher in the active than in the control group. MAE-free survivals and quality of life were compared in both groups. The characteristics of the study groups were similar. Over a follow-up of 18.3 months, 17.3% of patients in the active and 19.1% in the control group experienced at least one MAE (P < 0.01 for non-inferiority). Hospitalizations for atrial arrhythmias (6 vs. 18) and strokes (2 vs. 8) were fewer (P < 0.05), and the number of interim ambulatory visits was 56% lower (P < 0.001) in the active than the control group. Changes in pacemaker programming or drug regimens were made in 62% of visits in the active vs. 29% in the control group (P < 0.001). Quality of life remained unchanged in both groups. Remote monitoring was a safe alternative to conventional care and significantly lowered the number of ambulatory visits during long-term follow-up of permanently paced patients. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00989326.
doi_str_mv 10.1093/eurheartj/ehr419
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_3341630</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1020189506</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c526t-8224b31a9a1af72d91c442f583c76a36e1d510f4ac25724ed1f1fe107e26e32a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkd1rFDEUxYModlt990nmRWgfxubmayYvwrKoFVYqWMEHIaSZm53UmcmazBbsX-8ss64fTxdyfufcGw4hL4C-Bqr5Je5SizaNd5fYJgH6EVmAZKzUSsjHZEFBy1Kp-usJOc35jlJaK1BPyQljwCoB9YJ8WxbJDk3swwM2xZiC7Yroiy4Om3LE1BcJ-zhi0cchjDGFYbOXt9Zhb79jmmQXtgGHMRfnNy0Wq-uPn5af56CLZ-SJt13G54d5Rr68e3uzuirX1-8_rJbr0kmmxrJmTNxysNqC9RVrNDghmJc1d5WyXCE0EqgX1jFZMYENePAItEKmkDPLz8ibOXe7u-2xcdM5yXZmm0Jv008TbTD_KkNozSbeG84FKE6ngIs5oP3PdrVcm_0bpZpKpvk9TOz5YVmKP3aYR9OH7LDr7IBxlw1QRqHWkqoJpTPqUsw5oT9mAzX7As2xQDMXOFle_v2Vo-F3YxPw6gDY7Gznp_ZcyH84WTOomeC_AADbpxM</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1020189506</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A randomized trial of long-term remote monitoring of pacemaker recipients (The COMPAS trial)</title><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>MABO, Philippe ; VICTOR, Frederic ; BAZIN, Patrick ; AHRES, Saïd ; BABUTY, Dominique ; COSTA, Antoine Da ; BINET, Didier ; DAUBERT, Jean-Claude</creator><creatorcontrib>MABO, Philippe ; VICTOR, Frederic ; BAZIN, Patrick ; AHRES, Saïd ; BABUTY, Dominique ; COSTA, Antoine Da ; BINET, Didier ; DAUBERT, Jean-Claude ; COMPAS Trial Investigators</creatorcontrib><description>Professional practice guidelines recommend that pacemaker recipients be followed regularly. However, the majority of scheduled ambulatory visits is unproductive and imposes a heavy burden on the health-care system. The COMPAS randomized, multicentre, non-inferiority trial examined the safety of long-term remote monitoring of pacemakers. Between December 2005 and January 2008, 538 patients were randomly assigned to remote monitoring follow-up (active group) vs. standard care (control group). The primary objective was to confirm that the proportion of patients who experienced at least one major adverse event (MAE), including all-cause death and hospitalizations for device-related or cardiovascular adverse events, was not &gt;7% higher in the active than in the control group. MAE-free survivals and quality of life were compared in both groups. The characteristics of the study groups were similar. Over a follow-up of 18.3 months, 17.3% of patients in the active and 19.1% in the control group experienced at least one MAE (P &lt; 0.01 for non-inferiority). Hospitalizations for atrial arrhythmias (6 vs. 18) and strokes (2 vs. 8) were fewer (P &lt; 0.05), and the number of interim ambulatory visits was 56% lower (P &lt; 0.001) in the active than the control group. Changes in pacemaker programming or drug regimens were made in 62% of visits in the active vs. 29% in the control group (P &lt; 0.001). Quality of life remained unchanged in both groups. Remote monitoring was a safe alternative to conventional care and significantly lowered the number of ambulatory visits during long-term follow-up of permanently paced patients. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00989326.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0195-668X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1522-9645</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehr419</identifier><identifier>PMID: 22127418</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford: Oxford University Press</publisher><subject>Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Arrhythmias, Cardiac ; Arrhythmias, Cardiac - therapy ; Bioengineering ; Biological and medical sciences ; Cardiac Pacing, Artificial ; Cardiac Pacing, Artificial - mortality ; Cardiology and cardiovascular system ; Cardiology. Vascular system ; Clinical Research ; Female ; Follow-Up Studies ; Human health and pathology ; Humans ; Kaplan-Meier Estimate ; Life Sciences ; Male ; Medical sciences ; Pacemaker, Artificial ; Postoperative Care ; Postoperative Care - methods ; Postoperative Care - mortality ; Radiotherapy. Instrumental treatment. Physiotherapy. Reeducation. Rehabilitation, orthophony, crenotherapy. Diet therapy and various other treatments (general aspects) ; Remote Consultation ; Remote Consultation - methods ; Treatment Outcome</subject><ispartof>European heart journal, 2012-05, Vol.33 (9), p.1105-1111</ispartof><rights>2015 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License</rights><rights>Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author [2011] 2011</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c526t-8224b31a9a1af72d91c442f583c76a36e1d510f4ac25724ed1f1fe107e26e32a3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c526t-8224b31a9a1af72d91c442f583c76a36e1d510f4ac25724ed1f1fe107e26e32a3</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-3302-9988</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,881,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=25821824$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22127418$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://hal.science/hal-00905293$$DView record in HAL$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>MABO, Philippe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>VICTOR, Frederic</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BAZIN, Patrick</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>AHRES, Saïd</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BABUTY, Dominique</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>COSTA, Antoine Da</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BINET, Didier</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DAUBERT, Jean-Claude</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>COMPAS Trial Investigators</creatorcontrib><title>A randomized trial of long-term remote monitoring of pacemaker recipients (The COMPAS trial)</title><title>European heart journal</title><addtitle>Eur Heart J</addtitle><description>Professional practice guidelines recommend that pacemaker recipients be followed regularly. However, the majority of scheduled ambulatory visits is unproductive and imposes a heavy burden on the health-care system. The COMPAS randomized, multicentre, non-inferiority trial examined the safety of long-term remote monitoring of pacemakers. Between December 2005 and January 2008, 538 patients were randomly assigned to remote monitoring follow-up (active group) vs. standard care (control group). The primary objective was to confirm that the proportion of patients who experienced at least one major adverse event (MAE), including all-cause death and hospitalizations for device-related or cardiovascular adverse events, was not &gt;7% higher in the active than in the control group. MAE-free survivals and quality of life were compared in both groups. The characteristics of the study groups were similar. Over a follow-up of 18.3 months, 17.3% of patients in the active and 19.1% in the control group experienced at least one MAE (P &lt; 0.01 for non-inferiority). Hospitalizations for atrial arrhythmias (6 vs. 18) and strokes (2 vs. 8) were fewer (P &lt; 0.05), and the number of interim ambulatory visits was 56% lower (P &lt; 0.001) in the active than the control group. Changes in pacemaker programming or drug regimens were made in 62% of visits in the active vs. 29% in the control group (P &lt; 0.001). Quality of life remained unchanged in both groups. Remote monitoring was a safe alternative to conventional care and significantly lowered the number of ambulatory visits during long-term follow-up of permanently paced patients. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00989326.</description><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Arrhythmias, Cardiac</subject><subject>Arrhythmias, Cardiac - therapy</subject><subject>Bioengineering</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Cardiac Pacing, Artificial</subject><subject>Cardiac Pacing, Artificial - mortality</subject><subject>Cardiology and cardiovascular system</subject><subject>Cardiology. Vascular system</subject><subject>Clinical Research</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Follow-Up Studies</subject><subject>Human health and pathology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Kaplan-Meier Estimate</subject><subject>Life Sciences</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Pacemaker, Artificial</subject><subject>Postoperative Care</subject><subject>Postoperative Care - methods</subject><subject>Postoperative Care - mortality</subject><subject>Radiotherapy. Instrumental treatment. Physiotherapy. Reeducation. Rehabilitation, orthophony, crenotherapy. Diet therapy and various other treatments (general aspects)</subject><subject>Remote Consultation</subject><subject>Remote Consultation - methods</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><issn>0195-668X</issn><issn>1522-9645</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkd1rFDEUxYModlt990nmRWgfxubmayYvwrKoFVYqWMEHIaSZm53UmcmazBbsX-8ss64fTxdyfufcGw4hL4C-Bqr5Je5SizaNd5fYJgH6EVmAZKzUSsjHZEFBy1Kp-usJOc35jlJaK1BPyQljwCoB9YJ8WxbJDk3swwM2xZiC7Yroiy4Om3LE1BcJ-zhi0cchjDGFYbOXt9Zhb79jmmQXtgGHMRfnNy0Wq-uPn5af56CLZ-SJt13G54d5Rr68e3uzuirX1-8_rJbr0kmmxrJmTNxysNqC9RVrNDghmJc1d5WyXCE0EqgX1jFZMYENePAItEKmkDPLz8ibOXe7u-2xcdM5yXZmm0Jv008TbTD_KkNozSbeG84FKE6ngIs5oP3PdrVcm_0bpZpKpvk9TOz5YVmKP3aYR9OH7LDr7IBxlw1QRqHWkqoJpTPqUsw5oT9mAzX7As2xQDMXOFle_v2Vo-F3YxPw6gDY7Gznp_ZcyH84WTOomeC_AADbpxM</recordid><startdate>20120501</startdate><enddate>20120501</enddate><creator>MABO, Philippe</creator><creator>VICTOR, Frederic</creator><creator>BAZIN, Patrick</creator><creator>AHRES, Saïd</creator><creator>BABUTY, Dominique</creator><creator>COSTA, Antoine Da</creator><creator>BINET, Didier</creator><creator>DAUBERT, Jean-Claude</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><general>Oxford University Press (OUP)</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>1XC</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3302-9988</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20120501</creationdate><title>A randomized trial of long-term remote monitoring of pacemaker recipients (The COMPAS trial)</title><author>MABO, Philippe ; VICTOR, Frederic ; BAZIN, Patrick ; AHRES, Saïd ; BABUTY, Dominique ; COSTA, Antoine Da ; BINET, Didier ; DAUBERT, Jean-Claude</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c526t-8224b31a9a1af72d91c442f583c76a36e1d510f4ac25724ed1f1fe107e26e32a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Arrhythmias, Cardiac</topic><topic>Arrhythmias, Cardiac - therapy</topic><topic>Bioengineering</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Cardiac Pacing, Artificial</topic><topic>Cardiac Pacing, Artificial - mortality</topic><topic>Cardiology and cardiovascular system</topic><topic>Cardiology. Vascular system</topic><topic>Clinical Research</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Follow-Up Studies</topic><topic>Human health and pathology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Kaplan-Meier Estimate</topic><topic>Life Sciences</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Pacemaker, Artificial</topic><topic>Postoperative Care</topic><topic>Postoperative Care - methods</topic><topic>Postoperative Care - mortality</topic><topic>Radiotherapy. Instrumental treatment. Physiotherapy. Reeducation. Rehabilitation, orthophony, crenotherapy. Diet therapy and various other treatments (general aspects)</topic><topic>Remote Consultation</topic><topic>Remote Consultation - methods</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>MABO, Philippe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>VICTOR, Frederic</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BAZIN, Patrick</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>AHRES, Saïd</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BABUTY, Dominique</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>COSTA, Antoine Da</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BINET, Didier</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DAUBERT, Jean-Claude</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>COMPAS Trial Investigators</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>Hyper Article en Ligne (HAL)</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>European heart journal</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>MABO, Philippe</au><au>VICTOR, Frederic</au><au>BAZIN, Patrick</au><au>AHRES, Saïd</au><au>BABUTY, Dominique</au><au>COSTA, Antoine Da</au><au>BINET, Didier</au><au>DAUBERT, Jean-Claude</au><aucorp>COMPAS Trial Investigators</aucorp><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A randomized trial of long-term remote monitoring of pacemaker recipients (The COMPAS trial)</atitle><jtitle>European heart journal</jtitle><addtitle>Eur Heart J</addtitle><date>2012-05-01</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>33</volume><issue>9</issue><spage>1105</spage><epage>1111</epage><pages>1105-1111</pages><issn>0195-668X</issn><eissn>1522-9645</eissn><abstract>Professional practice guidelines recommend that pacemaker recipients be followed regularly. However, the majority of scheduled ambulatory visits is unproductive and imposes a heavy burden on the health-care system. The COMPAS randomized, multicentre, non-inferiority trial examined the safety of long-term remote monitoring of pacemakers. Between December 2005 and January 2008, 538 patients were randomly assigned to remote monitoring follow-up (active group) vs. standard care (control group). The primary objective was to confirm that the proportion of patients who experienced at least one major adverse event (MAE), including all-cause death and hospitalizations for device-related or cardiovascular adverse events, was not &gt;7% higher in the active than in the control group. MAE-free survivals and quality of life were compared in both groups. The characteristics of the study groups were similar. Over a follow-up of 18.3 months, 17.3% of patients in the active and 19.1% in the control group experienced at least one MAE (P &lt; 0.01 for non-inferiority). Hospitalizations for atrial arrhythmias (6 vs. 18) and strokes (2 vs. 8) were fewer (P &lt; 0.05), and the number of interim ambulatory visits was 56% lower (P &lt; 0.001) in the active than the control group. Changes in pacemaker programming or drug regimens were made in 62% of visits in the active vs. 29% in the control group (P &lt; 0.001). Quality of life remained unchanged in both groups. Remote monitoring was a safe alternative to conventional care and significantly lowered the number of ambulatory visits during long-term follow-up of permanently paced patients. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00989326.</abstract><cop>Oxford</cop><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><pmid>22127418</pmid><doi>10.1093/eurheartj/ehr419</doi><tpages>7</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3302-9988</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0195-668X
ispartof European heart journal, 2012-05, Vol.33 (9), p.1105-1111
issn 0195-668X
1522-9645
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_3341630
source Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current); MEDLINE; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Arrhythmias, Cardiac
Arrhythmias, Cardiac - therapy
Bioengineering
Biological and medical sciences
Cardiac Pacing, Artificial
Cardiac Pacing, Artificial - mortality
Cardiology and cardiovascular system
Cardiology. Vascular system
Clinical Research
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Human health and pathology
Humans
Kaplan-Meier Estimate
Life Sciences
Male
Medical sciences
Pacemaker, Artificial
Postoperative Care
Postoperative Care - methods
Postoperative Care - mortality
Radiotherapy. Instrumental treatment. Physiotherapy. Reeducation. Rehabilitation, orthophony, crenotherapy. Diet therapy and various other treatments (general aspects)
Remote Consultation
Remote Consultation - methods
Treatment Outcome
title A randomized trial of long-term remote monitoring of pacemaker recipients (The COMPAS trial)
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-05T18%3A33%3A00IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20randomized%20trial%20of%20long-term%20remote%20monitoring%20of%20pacemaker%20recipients%20(The%20COMPAS%20trial)&rft.jtitle=European%20heart%20journal&rft.au=MABO,%20Philippe&rft.aucorp=COMPAS%20Trial%20Investigators&rft.date=2012-05-01&rft.volume=33&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=1105&rft.epage=1111&rft.pages=1105-1111&rft.issn=0195-668X&rft.eissn=1522-9645&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/eurheartj/ehr419&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E1020189506%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1020189506&rft_id=info:pmid/22127418&rfr_iscdi=true