Literature DB >> 28040461

The Micra Leadless Transcatheter Pacemaker. Implantation and Mid-term Follow-up Results in a Single Center.

José Luis Martínez-Sande1, Javier García-Seara2, Moisés Rodríguez-Mañero2, Xesús Alberte Fernández-López2, Laila González-Melchor2, Alfredo Redondo-Diéguez2, Rocío González-Ferreiro2, José Ramón González-Juanatey2.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION AND
OBJECTIVES: Currently, studies on the leadless pacemaker (Micra) have mostly been limited to clinical trials with less than 6 months' follow-up and they often fail to reflect real population outcomes. We sought to evaluate electrical parameters at implantation and chronologically during follow-up, as well as the safety of this new technique.
METHODS: This prospective, observational study included 30 consecutive patients, all ≥ 65 years, with an indication for single-chamber pacemaker implantation.
RESULTS: Successful implantation was accomplished in all patients referred for leadless implantation. The mean age was 79.4±6.4 years (range, 66-89 years); 20 (66.6%) were men and 28 had permanent atrial fibrillation (93.3%); 1 had atrial tachycardia and 1 had sinus rhythm. Concomitant atrioventricular node ablation was performed immediately after implantation in 5 patients (16.6%), and implantation was performed after transcatheter aortic valve implantation in 2. The procedure was performed under an uninterrupted anticoagulation regimen (maximum INR 2.4) in 23 patients (76.6%). With the exception of 1 moderate pericardial effusion without tamponade, there were no severe complications. The mean follow-up was 5.3±3.3 months and 4 patients had more than 1 year of follow-up. Sensing and pacing parameters were stable both at implantation and during the short- to mid-term follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS: Implantation of leadless pacemakers is feasible, safe and provides advantages over the conventional system. Further studies with longer follow-up periods will be needed before these devices become widely used in routine clinical practice.
Copyright © 2016 Sociedad Española de Cardiología. Published by Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Atrial fibrillation; Cardiac pacing; Estimulación cardiaca; Fibrilación auricular; Leadless pacemaker; Marcapasos percutáneo sin cable

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 28040461     DOI: 10.1016/j.rec.2016.11.027

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Rev Esp Cardiol (Engl Ed)        ISSN: 1885-5857


  5 in total

1.  Transcatheter leadless permanent pacemaker in complex congenital heart disease with interrupted inferior vena cava: A challenging implantation.

Authors:  Babu Ezhumalai; Jitendra Singh Makkar
Journal:  Indian Pacing Electrophysiol J       Date:  2022-03-29

Review 2.  The Effects of Catheter Ablation on Permanent Pacemakers and Implantable Cardiac Defibrillators.

Authors:  Yousef H Darrat; Gustavo X Morales; Claude S Elayi
Journal:  J Innov Card Rhythm Manag       Date:  2017-03-15

3.  Insufficient procedural anticoagulation during leadless pacing led to catheter-related thrombosis in a hemodialysis patient.

Authors:  Qiang Chen; Yong Jiang Ma; Chun Hong Zhang; Li Wei Zhang
Journal:  BMC Cardiovasc Disord       Date:  2021-10-18       Impact factor: 2.298

Review 4.  Efficacy and safety of leadless pacemaker: A systematic review, pooled analysis and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Daniel Darlington; Philip Brown; Vanessa Carvalho; Hayley Bourne; Joseph Mayer; Nathan Jones; Vincent Walker; Shoaib Siddiqui; Ashish Patwala; Chun Shing Kwok
Journal:  Indian Pacing Electrophysiol J       Date:  2021-12-16

5.  Incidence of pacing-induced cardiomyopathy in pacemaker-dependent patients is lower with leadless pacemakers compared to transvenous pacemakers.

Authors:  Reynaldo Sanchez; Anish Nadkarni; Benjamin Buck; Georges Daoud; Tanner Koppert; Toshimasa Okabe; Mahmoud Houmsse; Raul Weiss; Ralph Augostini; John D Hummel; Steven Kalbfleisch; Emile G Daoud; Muhammad R Afzal
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol       Date:  2020-11-25
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.