Background Permanent cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) are traditionally implanted with the assistance of fluoroscopy. While clinically effective, this technique exposes both patients and providers to radiation which is associated with adverse health effects and represents an occupational hazard. In this study, we investigate the safety and feasibility of permanent CIED placement under the guidance of transthoracic echocardiography (TTE). There is also increasing interest in use of non‐fluoroscopic options for noninvasive cardiac electrophysiologic procedures. Methods Fifteen patients consecutively consented for initial implant of CIEDs, specifically dual chamber pacemakers (DCPM) and dual chamber implantable cardioverter defibrillators (DCICDs). Patients were excluded if they had previous implants, abandoned leads, or anatomic anomalies including congenital and known persistent left superior vena cava (PLSVC). We used TTE to guide and implant atrial and ventricular leads. Results Eleven patients received DCPMs and four patients received DCICDs. The procedure duration was 49.3 min for DCICD and 52.3 min for DCPM, p = .807. The average number of right atrial lead attempts was 1.6 for DCPMs and 1.8 for DCICD, p = .860. The average number of right ventricular lead attempts for DCPMs was 2.2 and 1.0 attempt for DCICDs, p = .044. There were no complications at 90‐day follow‐up. Conclusion We demonstrate the feasibility of TTE‐guided DCPM/DCICD implantation without use of fluoroscopy. We present this method as a safe alternative for permanent CIED placement that may reduce risk of radiation exposure and cost while maintaining safety and efficacy. No operators wore lead aprons during the procedure.

Background Automated phone appointment reminders have improved adherence with follow‐up appointments in a variety of hospital settings, but have mixed results in patients discharged from the emergency department (ED). Increasing adherence to follow‐up care has been a priority in the ED to improve patient outcomes and reduce unnecessary future visits. Methods We conducted a prospective randomized open, blinded end‐point (PROBE) trial of 278 adult patients discharged from the ED and referred to a provider for follow‐up care. Participants in the intervention arm received a self‐scheduling text or phone message that automatically connected them to their referral provider to schedule a follow‐up appointment and sent them appointment reminders. Those in the control arm received standard‐of‐care written instructions to contact listed referral providers. The primary outcome was time to appointment. The secondary outcome was time to return visit to the ED. Results The automated reminders increased the cumulative incidence of keeping the referral appointment after ED discharge (p < 0.001, Gray's test). Of participants randomized to the automated phone intervention, 49.3% (n = 74) kept their follow‐up appointment versus 23.4% (n = 30) in the control arm, with a hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) over the duration of the study period of 2.4 (1.6 to 3.7; p < 0.001). In a sensitivity analysis using 30 days of follow‐up data, 42.0% (n = 63) of participants randomized to the phone intervention kept their follow‐up versus 21.1% (n = 27) in the control arm, with a HR (95% CI) of 2.2 (1.4 to 3.5; p < 0.001). There was no difference in ED revisits between the intervention and control group within 120 days postdischarge. Conclusions An automated self‐scheduling phone system significantly improved follow‐up adherence after ED discharge, but did not decrease ED revisits.