Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT00401466

Remote Follow-up of Patients Receiving Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator for Prophylactic Therapy

The completed MADIT II study has shown that implantation of a cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) in patients with a reduced left ventricular ejection fraction and a prior myocardial infarction reduces death from any cause. The probability of the first therapy due to ventricular tachyarrhythmia was about 34% within 3 years. With a 3-month ICD-follow-up scheme, as it is in the standard ICD therapy, the majority of patients is followed more closely than necessary with respect to anti-tachyarrhythmia ICD therapy.

A Home Monitoring (HM) function has been integrated into several ICD models from Biotronik (Berlin , Germany), for close remote monitoring of ICD patients. The HM function may substitute in-clinic follow-up controls.

The objective of our study is to compare a standard 3-month follow-up scheme and a 12-month follow-up scheme using HM in ICD recipients with the "MADIT II indications". The comparison should be made with respect to the difference in follow-up burden and the associated costs, and regarding possible impact of the remote follow-up via HM on all cause mortality, hospitalization, and patients' quality of life.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Age range

18 year–80 year

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Phase 4

Primary location

Hospital Na Homolce, Prague, Czechia

Loading trial locations.

About this study

The completed MADIT II study has shown that implantation of a cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) in patients with a reduced left ventricular ejection fraction and a prior myocardial infarction reduces death from any cause. The probability of the 1st therapy due to ventricular tachyarrhythmia was about 34% within 3 years, with an increasing incidence from year 1 to 3. With a 3-month ICD-follow-up scheme, as it is in the standard ICD therapy, the majority of patients is followed more closely than necessary with respect to anti-tachyarrhythmia ICD therapy.

A Home Monitoring (HM) function has been integrated into several ICD models from Biotronik (Berlin , Germany), for close remote monitoring of ICD patients. The HM function automatically transmits predefined parameters on a daily basis from the implanted devices to a web-based platform accessible only by registered patients' physicians. These data may substitute in-clinical follow-up controls.

The objective of our study is to compare a standard 3-month follow-up scheme and a 12-month follow-up scheme using HM in ICD recipients with the "MADIT II indications". The comparison should be made with respect to the difference in follow-up burden and the associated costs, and regarding possible impact of the remote follow-up via HM on all cause mortality, hospitalization, and patients' quality of life.

The patients should receive single- or dual-chamber ICD models with the HM function.

The pre-hospital-discharge protocol comprises standard ICD follow-up + specific ICD programming, and activation of the HM function. The 1st standard follow-up visit is performed 3 months after the pre-discharge control. At this visit the patients are randomized to 3- vs. 12-month follow-up scheme. For the 3-month follow-up group, routine visits are scheduled at 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, 24, and 27 months after patient discharge. For the 12-month (remote) follow-up group, routine visits are scheduled at 15 and 27 months after discharge. In either group, additional visits are scheduled on patient demand, due to device or lead problems, or due to the following Cardio Report (Home Monitoring) findings: Elective ICD replacement point, the 1st shock after discharge, an ineffective shock, ineffective anti-tachycardia pacing, ventricular pacing impedance outside the pre-defined range, shock impedance lower than 25 Ohm or greater than 110 Ohm, frequent arrhythmia episodes (according to pre-specified criteria).

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

Indication for implantation of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) according to the patient selection criteria used in the MADIT-II trial:

  • Myocardial infarction 1 month or more prior to entry
  • Ejection fraction of 30% or less within 3 months before entry

Exclusion criteria

  • NYHA functional class IV
  • Coronary revascularization later than 5 days after ICD implantation
  • First myocardial infarction within the past month
  • Advanced cerebrovascular disease
  • Any condition with a likelihood of death within the next 12 months
  • Pacing indication
  • Conventional ICD indication (i.e., criteria other than MADIT II)
  • Living in an area with insufficient GSM coverage

Treatment and study plan

Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator

Device

ICD with Biotronik Home Monitoring capability

Other names: Lexos VR-T, Lexos DR-T, Belos DR-T, Lumos VR-T

Primary outcomes

  1. Number of follow-up visits

    Time frame: 27 months

Secondary outcomes

  1. Total costs

    Time frame: 27 months

  2. Mortality from any cause

    Time frame: 27 months

  3. Quality of life (SF-36)

    Time frame: 27 months

  4. Hospitalization

    Time frame: 27 months

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Biotronik SE & Co. KG

Industry

Registry information

Official study title

Remote Follow-up for ICD-Therapy in Patients Meeting MADIT II Criteria (REFORM)

Acronym: REFORM

Important dates

Study start
2004
Primary completion
2008
Study completion
2008
First posted
Nov 20, 2006
Registry last updated
Jan 17, 2011

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.