Key result
Extended pacemaker battery longevity reduces expected replacements by only ~5% in patients aged ≥80.
Why the study?
The rate of device replacement in pacemaker recipients has not been investigated in detail.
Does increased pacemaker longevity reduce expected device replacement rates in pacemaker recipients?
Observational (n=542)
Yes
Does increased pacemaker longevity reduce expected device replacement rates in pacemaker recipients?
Current pacemaker technology provides sufficient longevity such that only a quarter of patients aged ≥70 will require replacement, and further battery improvements will have modest impact in older patients.
~25% of pacemaker recipients ≥70 expected to need replacement; leaves open modest effect of further longevity gains in octogenarians.
BACKGROUND: The rate of device replacement in pacemaker recipients has not been investigated in detail. HYPOTHESIS: Current pacemakers with automatic management of atrial and ventricular pacing output provide sufficient longevity to minimize replacement rate. METHODS: We considered a cohort of 542 pacemaker patients (age 78 ± 9 years, 60% male, 71% de-novo implants) and combined 1-month projected device longevity with survival data and late complication rate in a 3-state Markov model tested in several Monte Carlo computer simulations. Predetermined subgroups were: age < or ≥ 70; gender; primary indication to cardiac pacing. RESULTS: At the 1-month follow-up the reported projected device longevity was 153 ± 45 months. With these values the proportion of patients expected to undergo a device replacement due to battery depletion was higher in patients aged <70 (49.9%, range 32.1%-61.9%) than in age ≥70 (24.5%, range 19.9%-28.8%); in women (39.9%, range 30.8%-48.1%) than in men (32.0%, range 24.7%-37.5%); in sinus node dysfunction (41.5%, range 30.2%-53.0%) than in atrio-ventricular block (33.5%, range 27.1-38.8%) or atrial fibrillation with bradycardia (27.9%, range 18.5%-37.0%). The expected replacement rate was inversely related to the assumed device longevity and depended on age class: a 50% increase in battery longevity implied a 5% reduction of replacement rates in patients aged ≥80. CONCLUSIONS: With current device technology 1/4 of pacemaker recipients aged ≥70 are expected to receive a second device in their life. Replacement rate depends on age, gender, and primary indication owing to differences in patients' survival expectancy. Additional improvements in device service time may modestly impact expected replacement rates especially in patients ≥80 years.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Boriani et al. (2018) conducted an observational in Pacemaker recipients (n=542). Pacemaker longevity was evaluated on Expected device replacement due to battery depletion. Expected pacemaker replacement due to battery depletion was 49.9% in patients aged <70 and 24.5% in those ≥70; a 50% increase in battery longevity reduced replacement rates by 5% in patients ≥80.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: