Key result
High RVP burden in leadless pacemakers is linked to ~46% higher heart failure risk.
Why the study?
While an RVP burden of 40% or more increases HF risk in patients with transvenous pacemakers, the optimal RVP threshold for predicting HF in patients with leadless pacemakers was unclear.
Does a high right ventricular pacing burden (≥40% or ≥95%) increase the risk of new-onset or worsened clinical heart failure in patients with leadless pacemakers?
Cohort (n=3,210)
Does a high right ventricular pacing burden (≥40% or ≥95%) increase the risk of new-onset or worsened clinical heart failure in patients with leadless pacemakers?
In patients with leadless pacemakers, a right ventricular pacing burden ≥40% is associated with increased heart failure incidence, with the risk most pronounced in those with a pacing burden ≥95% (HR 1.46).
High right ventricular pacing burden was associated with increased heart failure risk in leadless pacemaker recipients; extends transvenous observations but remains hypothesis-generating.
Background Recent guidelines suggest that an RVP burden of 40% or more increases the risk of pacing-induced cardiomyopathy and heart failure (HF) in patients with transvenous pacemakers. However, the optimal RVP threshold for predicting HF in patients with leadless pacemakers (LP) is unclear. Purpose To assess the current RVP burden cutoff and explore how increased RVP burden influences HF development in patients with LPs. Methods Patients who underwent LP implantation from January 2015 to September 2025 were included. Patients with LPs implanted only in the right atrium were excluded. The RVP burden (%RVP) for each patient was extracted from the initial transmission via a vendor-neutral remote monitoring platform. The first date recorded with I50.x codes in ICD-10 was used to estimate the time to first HF after device implantation. These codes encompass all HF types, regardless of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Results We included 3210 patients with LPs, of whom the vast majority (99.4%) had a single-chamber device. The mean age was 76±13 years, 45.4% were female, and the baseline LVEF was 55.6±9.7%. Of 1769 patients with a documented LP indication, 1157 (65.4%) had atrioventricular (AV) block. The median %RVP was 70.1% [7.9–98.2%]. During a median follow-up of 2.3 [1.4–3.7] years, 589 (18.3%) patients experienced new-onset or worsened clinical HF. Patients with RVP ≥40% showed a higher incidence of HF than those with RVP <40% (P=0.0056) (Figure A). The multivariable Cox proportional hazards model, adjusted for age, sex, and AV block, showed that %RVP ≥95% was associated with a higher risk of HF than %RVP <10% (hazard ratio, 1.46 [1.16–1.84]), whereas the risk in %RVP from 10% to <95% did not differ significantly from that in %RVP <10% (Figure B). Conclusions The 40% RVP cutoff may be applicable for predicting HF in patients with LPs. However, the risk is most pronounced in patients who are highly dependent on RVP. These findings have implications for patient selection for LP.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Iwakawa et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in Leadless pacemaker implantation and risk of heart failure (n=3,210). High right ventricular pacing (RVP) burden (≥40% or ≥95%) vs. Low right ventricular pacing (RVP) burden (<40% or <10%) was evaluated on New-onset or worsened clinical heart failure (HR 1.46, 95% CI 1.16-1.84, p=0.0056). High right ventricular pacing burden in leadless pacemaker patients increased heart failure risk (P=0.0056 for ≥40% vs <40%; HR 1.46, 95% CI 1.16-1.84 for ≥95% vs <10%).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: