Enhancing Heart Failure Management: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Continuous Remote Telemedical Management vs. In-Person Visit in Patients with Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices.

Remote telemedical management (RTM) in heart failure (HF) patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) is a reliable approach to follow device-specific and heart failure-related parameters. However, while some positive outcome data is available, results are inconclusive. We aimed to assess the benefits of continuous remote telemonitoring (RTM) compared to the in-person visit (IPV) in reducing all-cause mortality, heart failure hospitalizations (HFH), cardiovascular (CV) deaths, and the occurrence of inappropriate therapy. The study comprised a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) testing RTM (device-related or other non-invasive telemonitoring systems) vs. IPV for the management of HF patients. The main endpoints were all-cause and CV mortality. Risk of bias and level of evidence were assessed. Hazard ratios (HRs), odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. CENTRAL, EMBASE and MEDLINE were searched, and only randomized controlled studies were included. Sixteen RCTs were identified, comprising a total of 11,232 enrolled patients. Seven studies evaluated all-cause mortality, resulting in an OR 0.83 (95% CI 0.72 to 0.96). When CV mortality was assessed, the RTM group showed a significant benefit compared to the IPV group (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.97). The risk of bias ranged from "low" to "some concerns" for most outcomes, and the certainty was low to moderate depending on the specific outcomes. RTM proved to be superior in reducing all-cause and CV mortality compared to IPV; however, there is a clear need to have standardized alert actions to achieve the mortality benefit.