Dual chamber pacemaker implantation showed no increase in complications compared to single chamber systems, with reintervention required in 5.3% of DDD units versus 5.0% of VVI units.
Cohort (n=337)
Does a dual chamber pacing system increase the complication rate compared to a single chamber pacing system in patients undergoing pacemaker implantation?
Dual chamber pacemakers can be implanted without an increased risk of complications compared to single chamber pacemakers.
Absolute Event Rate: 5.3% vs 5%
To compare the complication rate in patients having a dual chamber versus a single chamber pacing system, 337 consecutive procedures performed during a 3-year period were analyzed prospectively. Two hundred fifty-eight patients (77%) received a VVI pacemaker and 75 (23%) a DDD unit. Thirteen VVI (5%) and 4 DDD (5.3%) needed reintervention. Lead displacement with reoperation was required for three ventricular leads (1%) and one atrial lead (1.3%). Infection occurred in two VVI units (0.77%) and one DDD (1.33%) unit. Muscular stimulation was noticed among three DDD (4%) and nine VVI systems (3.5%). Urgent reprogramming was needed for 23 VVI (9%) and six DDD units (8%). There was no increase in complications with dual chamber pacing compared to single chamber systems.
Mueller et al. (1990) conducted a cohort in Pacemaker implantation (n=337). Dual chamber pacemaker (DDD) vs. Single chamber pacemaker (VVI) was evaluated on Reintervention rate. Dual chamber pacemaker implantation showed no increase in complications compared to single chamber systems, with reintervention required in 5.3% of DDD units versus 5.0% of VVI units.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: