Key result
Direct permanent pacemaker implantation beats temporary pacing by avoiding complications like infection and perforation.
Why the study?
Temporary pacemaker implantation is associated with serious adverse events, and optimal use strategies to minimize complications are needed.
Should temporary pacemakers be used prior to permanent pacemaker implantation in patients with severe bradydysrhythmia?
Population
Patients with severe bradydysrhythmia
Comparison
Temporary pacemaker use vs direct permanent pacemaker implantation
Design
Review
Authors
Loading...
May support direct permanent over temporary pacing to limit complications; leaves open need for prospective trials before practice change.
Should temporary pacemakers be used prior to permanent pacemaker implantation in patients with severe bradydysrhythmia?
Temporary pacemakers are associated with serious adverse events and should be bypassed in favor of direct permanent pacemaker implantation when clinical conditions allow.
Antoine Kossaify (2014) conducted a review in Severe bradydysrhythmia. Temporary pacemaker implantation vs. Direct permanent pacemaker implantation was evaluated. Direct permanent pacemaker implantation is recommended over temporary pacemaker use when clinical conditions allow, to avoid complications such as infection, cardiac perforation, and lead dislodgment.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: