Micra leadless pacemaker implantation was successfully achieved in 99% of patients with recent CIED infections, with no device-related infections requiring explantation.
Does the Micra transcatheter leadless pacemaker provide safe pacing without recurrent infection in patients with a recent CIED infection?
105 patients with prior cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infection who underwent Micra implant attempt ≤30 days from prior system explant. Mean age 72.7 years, 65.7% male.
Micra transcatheter leadless pacemaker implant
Major complications (events related to the Micra TPS or procedure resulting in death, permanent loss of device function, hospitalization, prolonged hospitalization by 48 hours or more, or system revision) and incidence of infection requiring device removalsafety
Implantation of a leadless pacemaker is safe and feasible in patients with a recent CIED infection, with no recurrent device infections observed.
Abstract Introduction Leadless pacemakers may provide a safe and attractive pacing option to patients with cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infection. We describe the characteristics and outcomes of patients with a recent CIED infection undergoing Micra implant attempt. Methods and Results Patients with prior CIED infection and device explant with Micra implant within 30 days, were identified from the Micra post approval registry. Procedure characteristics and outcomes were summarized. A total of 105 patients with prior CIED infection underwent Micra implant attempt ≤30 days from prior system explant (84 80% pacemakers and 13 12% ICD/CRT‐D). All system components were explanted in 93% of patients and explant occurred a median of 6 days before Micra implant, with 37% occurring on the day of Micra implant. Micra was successfully implanted in 99% patients, mean follow‐up duration was 8.5 ± 7.1 months (range 0‐28.5). The majority of patients (91%) received IV antibiotics preimplant, while 42% of patients received IV antibiotics postprocedure. The median length of hospitalization following Micra implant was 2 days (IQR, 1‐7). During follow‐up, two patients died from sepsis and four patients required system upgrade, of which two patients received Micra to provide temporary pacing support. There were no Micra devices explanted due to infection. Conclusion Implantation of the Micra transcatheter pacemaker is safe and feasible in patients with a recent CIED infection. No recurrent infections that required Micra device removal were seen. Leadless pacemakers appear to be a safe pacing alternative for patients with CIED infection who undergo extraction.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Mikhael F. El‐Chami
Jens Brock Johansen
Amir Zaidi
Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique
Inserm
Emory University
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
El‐Chami et al. (Sun,) reported a other. Micra leadless pacemaker implantation was successfully achieved in 99% of patients with recent CIED infections, with no device-related infections requiring explantation.
www.synapsesocial.com/papers/69696f1dd139f3696c2c861f — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jce.13851