Key result
Female patients with dual-chamber pacemakers had similar rates of adverse events resulting in DDD mode loss compared to males, despite being older at implantation (64.7 vs 62.6 years).
Why the study?
Does gender affect the indications and long-term adverse events resulting in loss of DDD mode in patients with dual-chamber pacemakers?
Cohort (n=995)
No
Does gender affect the indications and long-term adverse events resulting in loss of DDD mode in patients with dual-chamber pacemakers?
Gender does not significantly impact the overall rate of adverse events leading to loss of DDD pacing mode, although indications for implantation differ.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No gender differences in device complications after dual-chamber pacing; leaves open whether implantation indications vary meaningfully by sex.
OBJECTIVE: Dual-chamber (DDD) pacing is the most commonly used mode of heart stimulation. The data on gender-related differences in the long-term follow-up of DDD pacing mode are still limited. We performed a retrospective single-centre study to determine the effect of gender on the implantation indications and the incidence of adverse events resulting in DDD mode loss. METHODS AND RESULTS: A group of 1,049 consecutive patients with DDD pacemaker implanted between 1984 and 2002 were followed up until 2014. The study group consisted of 995 patients who performed at least one follow-up visit. Follow-up period was 124.2 ± 68.3 months, mean age was 63.5 ± 12.4 years, 56% were male. Adverse events were defined as loss of primary DDD stimulation--lead malfunction, progression to permanent AF, and infective complications. Women were older than men (64.7 vs 62.6 years) at the time of implantation and they remained, on average, 1.5 year longer in follow-up compared with men. Female patients had significantly more SSS, history of paroxysmal AF, and a similar percentage of AVB compared with male patients. The incidence of lead malfunction, device-related infections, and progression to permanent AF did not show significant differences. However, in the group without prior paroxysmal AF, women developed permanent AF more frequently. CONCLUSIONS: This patients cohort showed that there is an association between gender and indications to DDD pacing therapy. The rate of adverse events was similar in both genders. Women had a significantly longer duration of follow-up, despite markedly higher age at implantation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dębski et al. (2016) conducted a cohort in Dual-chamber (DDD) pacemaker implantation (n=995). Female gender vs. Male gender was evaluated on Adverse events resulting in DDD mode loss (lead malfunction, progression to permanent AF, and infective complications). Female patients with dual-chamber pacemakers had similar rates of adverse events resulting in DDD mode loss compared to males, despite being older at implantation (64.7 vs 62.6 years).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: