Key result
Leadless pacemakers demonstrate an overall safe and effective profile in the short and intermediate term, overcoming transvenous lead and pocket-related complications.
Why the study?
Leadless pacemaker therapy was developed to overcome transvenous lead and device pocket-related complications, but current devices remain limited to single-chamber ventricular pacing.
Does leadless pacemaker therapy provide safe and effective pacing compared to conventional transvenous pacemakers?
Does leadless pacemaker therapy provide safe and effective pacing compared to conventional transvenous pacemakers?
Leadless pacemakers represent a safe and effective alternative to transvenous pacemakers, overcoming pocket and lead-related complications, with expanding clinical indications.
Theleadless pacemaker (LLPM) therapy has been developed in recent years to overcome the transvenous lead and device pocket-related complications. The LLPMs now available are self-contained right ventricular pacemakers and are limited to single-chamber ventricular pacing modality. This literature review deals with the current status of LLPM technology and current areas of clinical applicability. The safety and efficacy outcomes published from randomized clinical trials and real world registries are analyzed and compared with historical conventional transvenous pacemaker data. Furthermore, new pacing modalities and future perspectives to broaden the clinical use and cover most of pacing indications are discussed. Due to the overall safe and effective profile in the short term and intermediate term, also in fragile patients, the LLPM use is constantly growing in daily clinical practice. Actually, it can be considered a landmark innovation, through which a new era of cardiac pacing has begun.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Curnis et al. (2020) conducted a review in Cardiac pacing indications. Leadless pacemaker (LLPM) vs. Conventional transvenous pacemaker was evaluated. Leadless pacemakers demonstrate an overall safe and effective profile in the short and intermediate term, overcoming transvenous lead and pocket-related complications.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: