Key result
The superior vena cava approach for leadless pacemaker implantation provides a 38-40% gentler angle to the tricuspid valve compared to the inferior vena cava approach in smaller hearts.
Why the study?
Does leadless pacemaker implantation via the jugular approach improve anatomical feasibility and approach angle in patients with smaller hearts compared to the femoral approach?
Does leadless pacemaker implantation via the jugular approach improve anatomical feasibility and approach angle in patients with smaller hearts compared to the femoral approach?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The jugular approach for leadless pacemaker implantation may offer a safe and technically favorable alternative to the femoral approach, especially in patients with smaller anatomies, due to adequate right jugular vein size and a gentler delivery angle.
reported to reduce overall complications by 48%. 3 Although the frequency of acute complications internationally and in Japan is low at 3-4%, 4,5 cardiac perforation and pericardial effusion occur in 1-2%, 4-6 and these complications can be severe.In addition, real-world data from the USA are 16% for acute complications and 5% acute deaths, 7 and acute events are potentially fatal.Thus, although the current implantation of leadless pacemakers is safe and has shown T he main use of leadless pacemakers has been for patients with bradycardic atrial fibrillation and older patients, but recently they are being considered for use in younger patients who are at higher risk of infection, have a history of infection, or have endstage renal failure which vessel sparing is desired. 1 The utility of these pacemakers is high and the Micra CED study reported that they have a similar all-cause mortality rate and significantly lower rates of remote complications, device re-intervention, infection, and heart failure hospitalization as transvenous pacemakers. 2 Furthermore, leadless pacemakers have been
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ishibashi et al. (2024) conducted an editorial in Indication for leadless pacemaker in smaller heart anatomy. Jugular (superior vena cava) approach vs. Femoral (inferior vena cava) approach was evaluated. The superior vena cava approach for leadless pacemaker implantation provides a 38-40% gentler angle to the tricuspid valve compared to the inferior vena cava approach in smaller hearts.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: