Comparing Sensitivity and Specificity of Pacemaker ID Application and Cardiac Rhythm Management Device-Finder Application.

Overview

Smart phone-based applications to identify cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) are extremely useful in circumstances where urgent device interrogation is needed and device identification card is not available. Few studies have provided insight regarding the utility of these applications. We have studied two widely available applications i.e., Pacemaker ID app (PMIDa) or Cardiac Rhythm Management Devices-Finder (CRMD-f) to identiy device manufacturers in CIEDs.

Smart phone-based applications to identify cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) are extremely useful in circumstances where urgent device interrogation is needed and device identification card is not available. Few studies have provided insight regarding the utility of these applications. We have studied two widely available applications i.e., Pacemaker ID app (PMIDa) or Cardiac Rhythm Management Devices-Finder (CRMD-f) to identiy device manufacturers in CIEDs. 547 patients who underwent CIED implantation from year 2016 - 2020 in our institute were enrolled. There were 438 Medtronic and 109 St. Jude's devices. All chest radiographs were de-identified and resized into 225\*225 pixels focusing on the CIED. PMIDa and CRMD-f applications were used to identify CIED. Accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, and positive predictive value for both applications were calculated and compared.

Conditions

Interventions

Eligibility

Locations (1)

Outcomes