Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Journal of Cardiovas...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology
Article . 2023 . Peer-reviewed
License: Wiley Online Library User Agreement
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

Implantation of a leadless pacemaker in young adults

Authors: Marc Strik; Nicolas Clementy; Pierre Mondoly; Romain Eschalier; F. Daniel Ramirez; Hugo‐Pierre Racine; Michel Haïssaguerre; +3 Authors

Implantation of a leadless pacemaker in young adults

Abstract

AbstractAimsLeadless pacing has emerged as an alternative to conventional transvenous pacemakers to mitigate the risks of pocket‐ and lead‐related complications but its use remains controversial in young adults mostly because experience in this patient population is limited. We sought to examine the feasibility and safety of implanting leadless single chamber pacemakers in young adults.MethodsThis multicenter, retrospective, observational study sought to evaluate the safety, efficacy, and electrical performance of the Micra VR Transcatheter Pacemaker System (Medtronic) in patients between 18 and 40 years who underwent implantation of a leadless pacemaker for any indication at the university medical centers of Bordeaux, Clermont‐Ferrand, Toulouse, and Tours (France), between 2015 and 2021. The primary safety endpoint was freedom from system‐related or procedure‐related major complications at 6 months. The primary efficacy endpoint was the combination of a low (≤2 V) and stable (increase within 1.5 V) pacing capture threshold at 6 months.ResultsLeadless pacemaker implantation was successful in all 35 patients. At 6 months, safety endpoint was met for 35 (100%) and efficacy endpoint for 34 (97%) patients. During a follow‐up of 26 ± 15 months (range: 6–60 months), Safety endpoint remained 100% and efficacy endpoint was 94%. Leadless pacemaker retrieval was not required in any patient. Approximately one‐third of patients (n = 13, 37%) had >40% ventricular pacing burdens at 1 year, including all 10 patients with a complete AV block but also 3 patients with normal AV conduction during implantation. One patient reported symptoms of pacemaker syndrome which was confirmed using Holter recording and successfully treated using reprogramming.ConclusionIn this observational study, leadless pacemakers demonstrated favorable short‐ and intermediate‐term safety and effectiveness in young adults.

Keywords

Young Adult, Pacemaker, Artificial, Treatment Outcome, Humans, Arrhythmias, Cardiac, Equipment Design, Retrospective Studies

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    5
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
5
Top 10%
Average
Top 10%
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!