Leadless cardiac pacing: Results from a large single-centre experience

Background: The efficacy and safety of leadless cardiac pacing as an alternative to conventional transve-nous cardiac pacing in selected patients have been widely reported. Aim: To report the experience of a high-volume implantation centre with older and new generations of leadless pacemakers. Methods: This retrospective observational study included the first consecutive 400 patients who under-went implantation of a leadless pacemaker in our centre. Complications and electrical parameters were evaluated during follow-up, comparing patients implanted with first-generation (MicraTM VR) and second-generation (MicraTM AV) leadless pacemakers (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA). Data were collected by a review of medical files. Results: Among 400 procedures, there were 328 MicraTM VR pacemakers and 72 MicraTM AV pacemakers implanted, followed for a median of 16 months (694 patient-years). The mean age was 77 years and both groups had a high burden of co-morbidities. Implantation success rate was 99.5%. A total of 87.5% of patients were discharged the day after the procedure. The pacing threshold remained stable and < 2 V in 96.5% of all patients. The perioperative complication rate at 30 days was 3.5%. Outcomes were similar between the two groups. Conclusion: Leadless cardiac pacing is a safe and efficient alternative to conventional transvenous cardiac pacing.& COPY; 2023 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

Automated summary

This retrospective study evaluated the safety and efficacy of leadless pacemakers in older and newer generation patients. The implantation success rate was high and complication rate was low, indicating that leadless pacemakers are a safe and efficient alternative to conventional transvenous pacemakers.