Remote follow-up has proven its safety and efficacy in the literature, and indeed in daily use. It saves the patient time and travel, allows earlier detection of events, and reduces inappropriate shocks. At the same time, it is not infallible and definitely not a universal substitute for in-office visits, as the 5 cases below demonstrate. It saves time, but also takes some time, with problems and challenges we were hitherto not familiar with. Hopes for the future include uniform definitions regarding policy and responsibilities, reimbursement, even better connectivity, better alert management and remote programmability. To end on a more utopic note, it would be a huge step forward if devices and leads were so reliable that we did not need remote care to detect malfunctions.
