A Single-center Experience Comparing First- Versus Second-generation Insertable Cardiac Monitors in Pediatric Patients

Nathan Miller, Lisa Roelle, Dean Lorimer, Aarti S. Dalal, William B. Orr, George F. Van Hare, Jennifer N. Avari Silva

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

1 Scopus citations


Insertable cardiac monitors (ICMs) have undergone advancements in size and functionality over the past decade, resulting in the introduction of small, easily insertable devices capable of long-term remote monitoring. We define first-generation ICMs as implantable cardiac monitoring devices that require an incision and surgical creation of a subcutaneous pocket and second-generation ICMs as devices implanted using a custom-made tool for subcutaneous insertion, respectively. The aim of this study was to understand the differences between first- and second-generation pediatric ICM implants, implant indications, and time to diagnosis. We performed a retrospective, single-center chart review of patients who underwent ICM implantation from 2009-2019, spanning a 5-year course of first-generation ICM implantations and 5-year course of second-generation ICM implantations. Demographic data, past medical history, implant indication, and time to diagnosis were obtained. A total of 208 patients were identified over the 10-year time period, including 38 (18%) who underwent implantation with a first-generation device and 170 (82%) who underwent implantation with a second-generation device. Implant indications for first-generation ICMs included syncope (71%), palpitations (16%), inherited arrhythmia syndrome (IAS) management (5%), and premature ventricular contractions/ventricular tachycardia (VT) (8%); implant indications for second-generation ICMs included syncope (48%), palpitations (19%), IAS management (40%), premature ventricular contractions/VT (11%), atrial fibrillation (2%), tachycardia (3%), and heart block (0.5%). The average time to diagnosis was 38 weeks for patients with first-generation devices and 55 weeks for those with second-generation devices. With innovations in ICM technologies, there are expanding indications for ICM implantation in pediatric patients for long-term monitoring, specifically regarding the management of IAS patients.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)5048-5056
Number of pages9
JournalJournal of Innovations in Cardiac Rhythm Management
Issue number6
StatePublished - Jun 2022


  • Arrhythmias
  • inherited arrhythmia syndromes
  • insertable cardiac monitor
  • palpitations
  • pediatric electrophysiology
  • syncope


Dive into the research topics of 'A Single-center Experience Comparing First- Versus Second-generation Insertable Cardiac Monitors in Pediatric Patients'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this