RM of patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) is cost saving from the perspectives of the HCS, patients, and caregivers. Introducing appropriate reimbursements will make RM sustainable even for the provider, i.e. the hospitals which provide the service and encourage widespread adoption of RM.

No abstract

No abstract

Background: The subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) is an effective alternative to the transvenous ICD. No study has yet compared S-ICD and transvenous ICD by assessing patient acceptance as a patient-centered outcome.Objective: To evaluate the patient acceptance of the S-ICD and to investigate its association with clinical and implantation variables. In patients with symptomatic heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), the acceptance of the S-ICD was compared with a control group of patients who received a transvenous ICD.

In patients with permanent AF, the rhythm control strategy consisting of internal cardioversion, performed by means of the implanted cardioverter-defibrillator after 3 months of CRT, was associated with a high rate of sinus rhythm resumption on long-term follow-up and with a better echocardiographic response to CRT than that seen in patients treated according to a rate control strategy.