Use of Implantable Loop Recorders: Incidence, Indications for Use, and Pre-implant Rhythm Monitoring Across U.S. Health Systems from 2020-2025
- 1UCSF School of Medicine/San Francisco VA
Abstract
BackgroundImplantable loop recorders (ILRs) provide continuous rhythm monitoring. Professional society guidelines and expert consensus statements recommend ILR use for patients with recurrent syncope and cryptogenic stroke, but recommendations are weaker for other indications. We assessed ILR use over time and concordance between indication and clinical guidance.
MethodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study using Epic Cosmos data from 1/1/2020-12/31/2025. Among active patients with at least one of 13 diagnoses potentially eligible for ILR placement, we identified ILR placements and classified them by concordance with professional society guidance: concordant, possibly, or non-addressed. Annual incidence was estimated overall and by indication. We also described the proportion of patients who received longer-term (>7 days) rhythm monitoring in the year prior to placement.
ResultsOf 47,046,706 patients with diagnoses potentially eligible for ILR placement, 201,103 (0.4%) had an ILR placed. ILR placements increased from 3.08 ILRs per 100,000 patient-days in 2020 to 4.13 in 2025 (5.9% annual growth). The most common indications were cryptogenic stroke (28.6%) and atrial fibrillation without prior ablation (21.4%). Overall, 43.9% were guidance concordant, 28.5% possibly concordant, and 24.8% non-addressed. Relative annual growth in ILR placements per 100,000 patient-days was significant across all guidance categories: concordant (1.3%, 95% CI, 0.9%-1.7%), possibly concordant (5.5%, 95% CI, 5.0%-6.0%) and non-addressed (7.4%, 95% CI, 6.8%-8.0%). Among 125,631 outpatient placements, 50,181 (39.9%) had any prior long-term rhythm monitoring.
ConclusionILR placements are uncommon but increasing, with faster annual growth for indications that may not be guidance concordant. More than half of patients lacked long-term rhythm monitoring prior to outpatient ILR placement.
What is known- Prior research through 2018 demonstrated that many ILRs were placed for indications not supported by professional society guidelines or expert consensus statements. - Implantable loop recorder (ILR) technology has advanced with longer battery life, easier implantation processes, and robust remote monitoring and reprogramming.
What the Study Adds- ILR use remains uncommon for patients with diagnoses potentially eligible for ILR placement. - Annual incidence of ILR placement is increasing, especially among patients with indications not addressed by professional society guidelines or expert consensus statements. - Most ILR placements occur without pre-implant rhythm monitoring.
Related
- Unexplained Syncope in Patients With Congenital Long QT Syndrome ― Role of Implantable Loop Recorders in Diagnostic Evaluation ―
- Electrode perforation of a silicone breast implant in a subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator carrier: A previously unreported device complication.
- Long-term predictors of outcome in Brugada syndrome patients after implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implant.
- The hidden pause: Filtering of true prolonged asystole in implantable loop recorder monitoring platform by artificial intelligence.
- Increase in Reimbursement Does Not Necessarily Place a Financial Burden on Patients ― Background Behind the Reimbursement Revision for Remote Monitoring of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices in Japan ―
BibTeX
@misc{andersen2026implantable,
title = {{Use of Implantable Loop Recorders: Incidence, Indications for Use, and Pre-implant Rhythm Monitoring Across U.S. Health Systems from 2020-2025}},
author = {M. C. Andersen and J. S. Ross and R. Ghosh and L. C. L. Correia and S. S. Dhruva},
howpublished = {medRxiv},
year = {2026},
month = sep,
doi = {10.64898/2026.09.25.26364058},
url = {https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.09.25.26364058v1},
note = {CC BY-NC-ND},
}
RIS
TY - UNPB
TI - Use of Implantable Loop Recorders: Incidence, Indications for Use, and Pre-implant Rhythm Monitoring Across U.S. Health Systems from 2020-2025
AU - M. C. Andersen
AU - J. S. Ross
AU - R. Ghosh
AU - L. C. L. Correia
AU - S. S. Dhruva
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/09/25
PB - medRxiv
DO - 10.64898/2026.09.25.26364058
UR - https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.09.25.26364058v1
AB - BackgroundImplantable loop recorders (ILRs) provide continuous rhythm monitoring. Professional society guidelines and expert consensus statements recommend ILR use for patients with recurrent syncope and cryptogenic stroke, but recommendations are weaker for other indications. We assessed ILR use over time and concordance between indication and clinical guidance. MethodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study using Epic Cosmos data from 1/1/2020-12/31/2025. Among active patients with at least one of 13 diagnoses potentially eligible for ILR placement, we identified ILR placements and classified them by concordance with professional society guidance: concordant, possibly, or non-addressed. Annual incidence was estimated overall and by indication. We also described the proportion of patients who received longer-term (>7 days) rhythm monitoring in the year prior to placement. ResultsOf 47,046,706 patients with diagnoses potentially eligible for ILR placement, 201,103 (0.4%) had an ILR placed. ILR placements increased from 3.08 ILRs per 100,000 patient-days in 2020 to 4.13 in 2025 (5.9% annual growth). The most common indications were cryptogenic stroke (28.6%) and atrial fibrillation without prior ablation (21.4%). Overall, 43.9% were guidance concordant, 28.5% possibly concordant, and 24.8% non-addressed. Relative annual growth in ILR placements per 100,000 patient-days was significant across all guidance categories: concordant (1.3%, 95% CI, 0.9%-1.7%), possibly concordant (5.5%, 95% CI, 5.0%-6.0%) and non-addressed (7.4%, 95% CI, 6.8%-8.0%). Among 125,631 outpatient placements, 50,181 (39.9%) had any prior long-term rhythm monitoring. ConclusionILR placements are uncommon but increasing, with faster annual growth for indications that may not be guidance concordant. More than half of patients lacked long-term rhythm monitoring prior to outpatient ILR placement. What is known- Prior research through 2018 demonstrated that many ILRs were placed for indications not supported by professional society guidelines or expert consensus statements. - Implantable loop recorder (ILR) technology has advanced with longer battery life, easier implantation processes, and robust remote monitoring and reprogramming. What the Study Adds- ILR use remains uncommon for patients with diagnoses potentially eligible for ILR placement. - Annual incidence of ILR placement is increasing, especially among patients with indications not addressed by professional society guidelines or expert consensus statements. - Most ILR placements occur without pre-implant rhythm monitoring.
ER -