These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

156 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25256800)

  • 1. Implantable cardioverter defibrillator remote monitoring is well accepted and easy to use during long-term follow-up.
    Morichelli L; Porfili A; Quarta L; Sassi A; Ricci RP
    J Interv Card Electrophysiol; 2014 Dec; 41(3):203-9. PubMed ID: 25256800
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Remote monitoring of CRT-ICD: the multicenter Italian CareLink evaluation--ease of use, acceptance, and organizational implications.
    Marzegalli M; Lunati M; Landolina M; Perego GB; Ricci RP; Guenzati G; Schirru M; Belvito C; Brambilla R; Masella C; Di Stasi F; Valsecchi S; Santini M
    Pacing Clin Electrophysiol; 2008 Oct; 31(10):1259-64. PubMed ID: 18811805
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Correlates of patient acceptance of the cardioverter defibrillator: cross-validation of the Florida Patient Acceptance Survey in Danish patients.
    Pedersen SS; Spindler H; Johansen JB; Mortensen PT; Sears SF
    Pacing Clin Electrophysiol; 2008 Sep; 31(9):1168-77. PubMed ID: 18834469
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. [Safety and efficacy of classic ambulatory implantable cardioverter-defibrillator and resynchronisation systems follow-up compared to telemetric follow-up].
    Lelakowski J; Rydlewska A; Piekarz J; Lelakowska-Pieła M; Pudło J
    Pol Merkur Lekarski; 2016 Mar; 40(237):153-9. PubMed ID: 27088195
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Long-term patient acceptance of and satisfaction with implanted device remote monitoring.
    Ricci RP; Morichelli L; Quarta L; Sassi A; Porfili A; Laudadio MT; Gargaro A; Santini M
    Europace; 2010 May; 12(5):674-9. PubMed ID: 20200019
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Remote monitoring improves outcome after ICD implantation: the clinical efficacy in the management of heart failure (EFFECT) study.
    De Simone A; Leoni L; Luzi M; Amellone C; Stabile G; La Rocca V; Capucci A; D'onofrio A; Ammendola E; Accardi F; Valsecchi S; Buja G
    Europace; 2015 Aug; 17(8):1267-75. PubMed ID: 25842271
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A Low Critical Event Rate Despite a High Abnormal Event Rate in Patients with Cardiac Implantable Electric Devices Followed Up by Remote Monitoring.
    Morimoto Y; Nishii N; Tsukuda S; Kawada S; Miyamoto M; Miyoshi A; Nakagawa K; Watanabe A; Nakamura K; Morita H; Ito H
    Intern Med; 2019 Aug; 58(16):2333-2340. PubMed ID: 31118368
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A randomized study of remote monitoring and fluid monitoring for the management of patients with implanted cardiac arrhythmia devices.
    Lüthje L; Vollmann D; Seegers J; Sohns C; Hasenfuß G; Zabel M
    Europace; 2015 Aug; 17(8):1276-81. PubMed ID: 25983310
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Remote monitoring of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillators.
    De Filippo P; Luzi M; D'Onofrio A; Bongiorni MG; Giammaria M; Bisignani G; Menardi E; Ferrari P; Bianchi V; Viani S; Leidi C; Lovecchio M; Valsecchi S; Capucci A
    J Interv Card Electrophysiol; 2018 Dec; 53(3):373-381. PubMed ID: 30276592
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Economic impact of remote monitoring on ordinary follow-up of implantable cardioverter defibrillators as compared with conventional in-hospital visits. A single-center prospective and randomized study.
    Calò L; Gargaro A; De Ruvo E; Palozzi G; Sciarra L; Rebecchi M; Guarracini F; Fagagnini A; Piroli E; Lioy E; Chirico A
    J Interv Card Electrophysiol; 2013 Jun; 37(1):69-78. PubMed ID: 23515883
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The impact of remote monitoring of implanted cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) and cardiac resynchronisation therapy device (CRT-D) patients on healthcare costs in the Silesian population: three-year follow-up.
    Buchta P; Tajstra M; Kurek A; Skrzypek M; Świetlińska M; Gadula-Gacek E; Wasiak M; Pyka Ł; Gąsior M
    Kardiol Pol; 2017; 75(6):573-580. PubMed ID: 28150288
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Remote versus in-office monitoring for implantable cardioverter defibrillators: Results from a randomized pragmatic controlled study in Portugal.
    Oliveira M; Fernandes M; Reis H; Primo J; Sanfins V; Silva V; Cunha PS; Silva M; Nicola PJ;
    Rev Port Cardiol; 2022 Dec; 41(12):987-997. PubMed ID: 36229282
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Monitoring device acceptance in implantable cardioverter defibrillator patients using the Florida Patient Acceptance Survey.
    Versteeg H; Starrenburg A; Denollet J; Palen Jv; Sears SF; Pedersen SS
    Pacing Clin Electrophysiol; 2012 Mar; 35(3):283-93. PubMed ID: 22229519
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Long-term patient satisfaction with implanted device remote monitoring: a comparison among different systems.
    Artico J; Zecchin M; Zorzin Fantasia A; Skerl G; Ortis B; Franco S; Albani S; Barbati G; Cristallini J; Cannata' A; Sinagra G
    J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown); 2019 Aug; 20(8):542-550. PubMed ID: 31107287
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Improved survival in patients enrolled promptly into remote monitoring following cardiac implantable electronic device implantation.
    Mittal S; Piccini JP; Snell J; Prillinger JB; Dalal N; Varma N
    J Interv Card Electrophysiol; 2016 Aug; 46(2):129-36. PubMed ID: 26860839
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Impact of remote monitoring on clinical events and associated health care utilization: A nationwide assessment.
    Piccini JP; Mittal S; Snell J; Prillinger JB; Dalal N; Varma N
    Heart Rhythm; 2016 Dec; 13(12):2279-2286. PubMed ID: 27544748
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Patient satisfaction with remote monitoring of cardiac implantable electronic devices: the VALIOSA questionnaire.
    Ruiz Díaz MA; Egea García M; Muñoz Aguilera R; Viñolas Prat X; Silvestre García J; Álvarez Orozco M; Martínez Ferrer J;
    BMC Health Serv Res; 2020 Apr; 20(1):354. PubMed ID: 32334573
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Management of cardiac implantable electronic device follow-up in COVID-19 pandemic: Lessons learned during Italian lockdown.
    Piro A; Magnocavallo M; Della Rocca DG; Neccia M; Manzi G; Mariani MV; Straito M; Bernardini A; Severino P; Iannucci G; Giunta G; Chimenti C; Natale A; Fedele F; Lavalle C
    J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol; 2020 Nov; 31(11):2814-2823. PubMed ID: 32954600
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. [The evaluation of the ventricular arrhythmias and interventions of cardiac implantable electronic devices in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death in ambulatory and telemetric follow-up].
    Lelakowski J; Rydlewska A; Lelakowska M; Pudło J; Piekarz J
    Pol Merkur Lekarski; 2017 Jan; 42(247):13-20. PubMed ID: 28134226
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Effect of remote monitoring on patient-reported outcomes in European heart failure patients with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator: primary results of the REMOTE-CIED randomized trial.
    Versteeg H; Timmermans I; Widdershoven J; Kimman GJ; Prevot S; Rauwolf T; Scholten MF; Zitron E; Mabo P; Denollet J; Pedersen SS; Meine M
    Europace; 2019 Sep; 21(9):1360-1368. PubMed ID: 31168604
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.