Key result
Leadless pacemaker implantation achieves 98% procedural success in high-risk patients with low 1-year complications.
Why the study?
Transvenous pacemakers carry significant complications, and data on leadless pacemakers in high-risk patients ineligible for transvenous systems remain limited.
Does leadless pacemaker implantation provide safe and effective pacing in high-risk bradyarrhythmia patients unsuitable for transvenous pacing?
Observational (n=138)
Yes
Does leadless pacemaker implantation provide safe and effective pacing in high-risk bradyarrhythmia patients unsuitable for transvenous pacing?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Leadless pacemaker implantation is a safe and effective alternative with high procedural success and low complication rates in high-risk patients unsuitable for transvenous systems.
INTRODUCTION: Transvenous pacemakers are effective but carry significant short- and long-term complications. Leadless pacemakers were developed to overcome these limitations, however, data in high-risk patients ineligible for transvenous systems remain limited. AIM: To evaluate the real-world outcomes of leadless pacemaker in high risk bradyarrhythmia patients unsuitable for transvenous pacing. METHODS: A retrospective, observational, multi center registry (MLPI) across four Israeli hospitals, included all patients undergoing leadless pacemaker implantation July 2021-December 2022 within a national pilot program. Indications included venous abnormalities, prior device infection, Twiddler's syndrome or high infection risk. Procedural success, complications, electrical performance, and mortality were assessed at 48 h, 30 days, and 12 months. RESULTS: A total of 138 patients were enrolled, with a high comorbidity burden (hypertension 74%, heart failure 44%, chronic kidney disease 36%). High grade atrioventricular block was the main pacing indication (70%), and the leading reason for leadless implantation (54%) was high infection risk. Implantation was successful in 98% of the patients, almost all with Micra. Acute complications occurred in 2.9%, (primarily pericardial effusion); three patients (2.2%) died within 48 h. At 1-year, electrical performance remained stable, with low pacing thresholds (median 0.5 V), preserved sensing, and declining impedance. Two late complications occurred (tamponade, loss of capture). The 1-year cumulative complication rate was 4.7%, and all-cause mortality 12.3%. CONCLUSION: Leadless pacemaker implantation in a very high-risk Israeli cohort achieved high procedural success, stable performance, and low complication rate, supporting its role as a safe and effective alternative to conventional pacing systems.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Katz et al. (2026) conducted an observational in High risk bradyarrhythmia unsuitable for transvenous pacing (n=138). Leadless pacemaker implantation was evaluated on Procedural success. Leadless pacemaker implantation in high-risk patients achieved a 98% procedural success rate, with a 1-year cumulative complication rate of 4.7% and all-cause mortality of 12.3%.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: