Does leadless intracardiac pacemaker implantation increase major adverse clinical events compared to transvenous ventricular pacing leads?
Patients undergoing pacemaker implantation
Leadless intracardiac pacemaker implantation (Micra)
Transvenous ventricular pacing leads implantation (CapSureFix)
Major adverse clinical events (MACE) including myocardial and vascular perforations, tears, cardiac tamponade, and deathsafety
While severe perforation complications with leadless pacemakers are rare (<1%), traditional transvenous ventricular pacing leads are associated with significantly fewer major adverse clinical events.
Micra leadless pacemaker implantation may be complicated by myocardial and vascular perforations and tears that result in cardiac tamponade and death. We estimate the incidence is low (<1%). Rescue surgery to repair perforations may be lifesaving. MACE are significantly less for implantation of CapSureFix transvenous ventricular pacing leads.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Robert G. Hauser
Charles C. Gornick
Raed Abdelhadi
Heart Rhythm
Minneapolis Heart Institute Foundation
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Hauser et al. (Fri,) studied this question.
www.synapsesocial.com/papers/69d570bc75589c71d767dece — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2021.03.015