Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30874886›Full record

Trial reportClinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society2019

Implant-based multi-parameter telemonitoring of patients with heart failure and a defibrillator with vs. without cardiac resynchronization therapy option: a subanalysis of the IN-TIME trial.

Johann Christoph Geller, Thorsten Lewalter, Niels Eske Bruun, Milos Taborsky, Frank Bode, Jens Cosedis Nielsen, Christoph Stellbrink, Steffen Schön, Holger Mühling, Hanno Oswald and 7 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Comprehensive vs. standard remote monitoring of cardiac resynchronization devices in heart failure patients: results of the ECOST-CRT study.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2024
    Trial
  4. Effect of remote monitoring on clinical outcomes in European heart failure patients with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator: secondary results of the REMOTE-CIED randomized trial.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2022
    Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 2023 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS Expert Consensus Statement on Practical Management of the Remote Device Clinic.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2023
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. A novel risk score to predict survival in advanced heart failure due to cardiac amyloidosis.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2020
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Heart failure as a substrate and trigger for ventricular tachycardia.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2019
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

17 authors at 10 institutions in 4 countries.

Johann Christoph GellerArrhythmia and Invasive Electrophysiology Section, Division of Cardiology, Zentralklinik Bad Berka, Bad Berka, Germany. christoph.geller@zentralklinik.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9033-8173
Thorsten LewalterUniversity Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Niels Eske BruunDepartment of Cardiology, University Hospital Gentofte, Hellerup, Denmark.
Milos TaborskyNa Homolce, Prague, Czech Republic.
Frank BodeII. Department of Medicine-Cardiology, Angiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Lübeck, Germany.
Jens Cosedis NielsenDepartment of Clinical Medicine, Århus University, Åarhus, Denmark.
Christoph StellbrinkClinic for Cardiology and Internistic Intensive Care Medicine, Bielefeld Clinical Center, Bielefeld, Germany.
Steffen SchönDivision of Cardiology, Vascular Medicine, Pneumology and Intensive Care Medicine, HELIOS Klinikum Pirna GmbH, Pirna, Germany.
Holger MühlingMedical Center for Cardiology, Munich, Germany.
Hanno OswaldClinic for Cardiology and Angiology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Sebastian ReifDepartment of Cardiology and Internistic Intensive Care Medicine, Munich State Hospital Bogenhausen, Munich, Germany.
Stefan KääbDepartment of Medicine I, Cardiology, Klinikum Großhadern, Munich, Germany.
Peter IllesSydney Adventist Hospital, Sydney, Australia.
Jochen ProffCenter for Clinical Research, Biotronik SE & Co. KG, Berlin, Germany.
Nikolaos DagresDepartment of Electrophysiology, University of Leipzig, Heart Center, Leipzig, Germany.
Gerhard HindricksDepartment of Electrophysiology, University of Leipzig, Heart Center, Leipzig, Germany.
IN-TIME Study Group
Leipzig Heart Institute · DEKlinikum Bielefeld · DEMünchen Klinik Bogenhausen · DESydney Adventist Hospital · AUUniversity Hospital Bonn · DEGentofte Hospital · DKKlinikum Oldenburg · DEMedizinische Hochschule Hannover · DENa Homolce Hospital · CZOtto-von-Guericke-Universität Magdeburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsIn the IN-TIME trial, automatic daily implant-based multiparameter telemonitoring significantly improved clinical outcomes in patients with chronic systolic heart failure and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) or cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator (CRT-D). We compared IN-TIME results for ICD and CRT-D subgroups.

methodsPatients with LVEF ≤ 35%, NYHA class II/III, optimized drug treatment, no permanent atrial fibrillation, and a dual-chamber ICD (n = 274) or CRT-D (n = 390) were randomized 1:1 to telemonitoring or no telemonitoring for 12 months. Primary outcome measure was a composite clinical score, classified as worsened if the patient died or had heart failure-related hospitalization, worse NYHA class, or a worse self-reported overall condition.

resultsThe prevalence of worsened score at study end was higher in CRT-D than ICD patients (26.4% vs. 18.2%; P = 0.014), as was mortality (7.4% vs. 4.1%; P = 0.069). With telemonitoring, odds ratios (OR) for worsened score and hazard ratios (HR) for mortality were similar in the ICD [OR = 0.55 (P = 0.058), HR = 0.39 (P = 0.17)] and CRT-D [OR = 0.68 (P = 0.10), HR = 0.35 (P = 0.018)] subgroups (insignificant interaction, P = 0.58-0.91).

conclusionDaily multiparameter telemonitoring has a potential to reduce clinical endpoints in patients with chronic systolic heart failure both in ICD and CRT-D subgroups. The absolute benefit seems to be higher in higher-risk populations with worse prognosis.

Indexed as

Defibrillators, ImplantableAgedCardiac Resynchronization TherapyCause of DeathFemaleFollow-Up StudiesGermanyHeart Failure, SystolicHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesRisk FactorsStroke VolumeSurvival RateTelemedicineRemote monitoring of cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillatorsRemote monitoring of implantable cardioverter-defibrillatorsTelemonitoring of patients with heart failure

Identifiers

PMID30874886
PMCPMC6753058
OpenAlexW2921801595

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.