Key result
Leadless pacemaker implantation in 3 adult patients with congenital heart disease resulted in no procedural or thromboembolic complications over the follow-up period.
Why the study?
Unique anatomic challenges frequently preclude transvenous pacemaker leads in patients with congenital heart disease, making leadless pacemaker systems a potential alternative.
Is leadless pacemaker implantation safe and feasible in adult patients with congenital heart disease who are not candidates for traditional transvenous pacing?
Case Report (n=3)
Is leadless pacemaker implantation safe and feasible in adult patients with congenital heart disease who are not candidates for traditional transvenous pacing?
Leadless pacemakers appear to be a safe and feasible alternative for adult patients with congenital heart disease who have anatomic challenges precluding traditional transvenous pacing.
May support use in select adult congenital heart disease patients; hypothesis-generating and requires larger prospective studies.
BACKGROUND: Transvenous pacemaker systems have significant advantages over epicardial systems in patients with congenital heart disease (CHD). Frequently though, unique anatomic challenges preclude the use of transvenous leads. Although originally developed for patient with normal anatomy, leadless pacemaker systems have enormous potential in the CHD population. OBJECTIVE: To describe an initial experience with leadless pacemaker implantation in adult patients with CHD who were not the candidates for traditional transvenous pacing. METHODS: This was a retrospective review of the experience with Micra Transcatheter Pacing System implantation in adult patients with CHD. Patient demographics, clinical history, pacing indications, procedural details, clinical outcomes, and pacing characteristics at follow-up are reported. RESULTS: Three patients with intracardiac shunts or tricuspid valve disorders who underwent leadless pacemaker placement are described. Pacing indications included sinus node dysfunction in two and permanent atrial fibrillation with atrioventricular (AV) block in one. There were no procedural or thromboembolic complications over the follow-up period. Pacing characteristics were acceptable and ventricular pacing burden remained low except for the single patient with AV block. CONCLUSIONS: Leadless pacemaker systems are a viable pacing option for appropriately selected adult patients with CHD when transvenous pacing is not a suitable option.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Russell et al. (2019) conducted a case report in Congenital heart disease (n=3). Micra Transcatheter Pacing System was evaluated on Procedural or thromboembolic complications. Leadless pacemaker implantation in 3 adult patients with congenital heart disease resulted in no procedural or thromboembolic complications over the follow-up period.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: