Cited by 515Cardiac pacing and defibrillation studiesCardiac Arrest and ResuscitationCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias

Long-Term Outcome After ICD and CRT Implantation and Influence of Remote Device Follow-Up: The ALTITUDE Survival Study

Open access
Saxon, Leslie A., Hayes, David L., Gilliam, F. Roosevelt, Heidenreich, Paul A., Day, John, Seth, Milan, Meyer, Timothy E., Jones, Paul W. +1 more·2010·Circulation

Abstract

Background—: Outcome data for patients receiving implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) and cardiac resynchronization therapy–defibrillator (CRT-D) devices treated outside of clinical trials are lacking. No clinical trial has evaluated mortality after device implantation or after shock therapy in large numbers of patients with implanted devices that regularly transmit device data over a network. Methods and Results—: Survival status in patients implanted with ICD and CRT devices across the United States from a single manufacturer was assessed. Outcomes were compared between patients followed in device clinic settings and those who regularly transmit remote data collected from the device an average of 4 times monthly. Shock delivery and electrogram analysis could be ascertained from patients followed on the network, enabling survival after ICD shock to be evaluated. One- and 5-year survival rates in 185 778 patients after ICD implantation were 92% and 68% and were 88% and 54% for CRT-D device recipients. In 8228 patients implanted with CRT-only devices, survival was 82% and 48% at 1 and 5 years, respectively. For the 69 556 ICD and CRT-D patients receiving remote follow-up on the network, 1- and 5-year survival rates were higher compared with those in the 116 222 patients who received device follow-up in device clinics only (50% reduction; P <0.0001). There were no differences between patients followed on or off the remote network for the characteristics of age, gender, implanted device year or type, and economic or educational status. Shock therapy was associated with subsequent mortality risk for both ICD and CRT-D recipients. Conclusions—: Survival after ICD and CRT-D implantation in patients treated in naturalistic practice compares favorably with survival rates observed in clinical trials. Remote follow-up of device data is associated with excellent survival, but arrhythmias that result in device therapy in this population are associated with a higher mortality risk compared with patients who do not require shock therapy.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/circulationaha.110.960633

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In a contemporary real-world ICD population, appropriate shocks occur in approximately 6% per year of ICD patients, and inappropriate shocks occur in approximately 8% per year.

    “In a contemporary real-world ICD population, appropriate shocks occur in ≈6% per year of ICD patients, and inappropriate shocks occur in ≈8% per year.24”

    From Managing with pacemakers and implantable cardioverter defibrillators (2013) · cites this paper as [24]

    The section “Shock Therapies and Programming in Patients Followed Up on the Network” reports the one-year figures in the opposite order: 8% appropriate shocks and 6% inappropriate shocks. The citing sentence reverses those rates. (LLM, conf=0.95)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • In the large but nonrandomized ALTITUDE study, the use of remote monitoring for ICD patients was associated with improved survival.

    “In the large but nonrandomized ALTITUDE study, in which monitoring was continuous, the use of remote monitoring for ICD patients was associated with improved survival”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Saxon, L. A., Hayes, D. L., Gilliam, F. R., Heidenreich, P. A., Day, J., Seth, M., Meyer, T. E., Jones, P. W., & Boehmer, J. P.
Affiliations
University of Southern California (US)
Venue
Circulation
Published
2010-12-07
Volume
122
Issue
23
Pages
2359-2367
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2034311573
Cited by
515
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 29 · 2020: 33 · 2019: 31 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 46 · 2016: 51 · 2015: 43 · 2014: 43 · 2013: 61 · 2012: 49
FWCI
28.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Circulation (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Cardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
Keywords
implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, CRT-D, remote device monitoring, mortality risk, device follow-up, electrogram analysis
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Altitude, Convulsive Therapy, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Prospective Studies, Time Factors, Survival Rate, Treatment Outcome, Defibrillators, Implantable, Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy, Remote Sensing Technology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review