Heart failure & cardiomyopathies
Economic evaluations of invasive devices for remote cardiac monitoring in chronic heart failure: a scoping review
Authors' conclusion
These findings align with recent national health-technology guidance recommending both technologies. Both technologies are economically advantageous for heart failure management across multiple healthcare systems. Future research should prioritize standardized health-economic modelling, explicit separation of technology subcategories with distinct comparators, randomized algorithm-on vs. algorithm-off designs, and dedicated evaluations in low- and middle-income countries to guide equitable global deployment.
Study context
- Population
- Adult heart failure patients; original peer-reviewed economic evaluations of invasive cardiac monitoring or cardiac implantable electronic device remote monitoringstudies across 11 countries · standalone invasive sensors (predominantly CardioMEMS) 10 · cardiac implantable electronic device remote monitoring nine
- Participants
- Nineteen patients
- Comparison
- cost-effectiveness of these distinct monitoring strategies
- standalone invasive sensorsn = 10
- cardiac implantable electronic device remote monitoringn = nine
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
- Cost-effective in high-income settings (the UK, continental Europe, and the USA)
- Device pricing exceeded cost-effectiveness thresholds in Argentina
Further findings
Economic outcomes of cardiac implantable electronic device remote monitoring vs in-office follow-up
- Consistently showed cost-neutral or cost-saving outcomes compared with in-office follow-up, with the largest savings in resynchronization-defibrillator recipients
- Advanced alert algorithms showed highly favourable economic profiles
- Both lacked ideal comparators testing identical device platforms with the algorithm deactivated
Original publication
Summarised from the published abstract; every number is checked against it