Affiliation:
1. Clinique Pasteur , 45 Avenue de Lombez BP 27617, 31076 Toulouse Cedex 3 , France
2. Medtronic, Inc. , Minneapolis, MN , USA
3. Medtronic International Trading Sàrl , Tolochenaz , Switzerland
4. Emory University School of Medicine , Atlanta, GA , USA
Abstract
Abstract
Aims
This study compares clinical outcomes between leadless pacemakers (leadless-VVI) and transvenous ventricular pacemakers (transvenous ventricular permanent-VVI) in subgroups of patients at higher risk of pacemaker complications.
Methods and results
This study is based on the Micra Coverage with Evidence Development (CED) study. Patients from the Micra CED study were considered in a high-risk subgroup if they had a diagnosis of chronic kidney disease Stages 4–5 (CKD45), end-stage renal disease, malignancy, diabetes, tricuspid valve disease (TVD), or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) 12 months prior to pacemaker implant. A pre-specified set of complications and reinterventions were identified using diagnosis and procedure codes. Competing risks models were used to compare reinterventions and complications between leadless-VVI and transvenous-VVI patients within each subgroup; results were adjusted for multiple comparisons. A post hoc comparison of a composite outcome of reinterventions and device complications was conducted. Out of 27 991 patients, 9858 leadless-VVI and 12 157 transvenous-VVI patients have at least one high-risk comorbidity. Compared to transvenous-VVI patients, leadless-VVI patients in four subgroups [malignancy, HR 0.68 (0.48–0.95); diabetes, HR 0.69 (0.53–0.89); TVD, HR 0.60 (0.44–0.82); COPD, HR 0.73 (0.55–0.98)] had fewer complications, in three subgroups [diabetes, HR 0.58 (0.37–0.89); TVD, HR 0.46 (0.28–0.76); COPD, HR 0.51 (0.29–0.90)) had fewer reinterventions, and in four subgroups (malignancy, HR 0.52 (0.32–0.83); diabetes, HR 0.52 (0.35–0.77); TVD, HR 0.44 (0.28–0.70); COPD, HR 0.55 (0.34–0.89)] had lower rates of the combined outcome.
Conclusion
In a real-world study, leadless pacemaker patients had lower 2-year complications and reinterventions rates compared with transvenous-VVI pacing in several high-risk subgroups.
Trial Registration
ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT03039712
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Subject
Physiology (medical),Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
Reference19 articles.
1. Long-term performance of a transcatheter pacing system: 12-month results from the Micra transcatheter pacing study;Duray;Heart Rhythm,2017
2. Updated performance of the Micra transcatheter pacemaker in the real-world setting: a comparison to the investigational study and a transvenous historical control;El-Chami;Heart Rhythm,2018
3. Contemporaneous comparison of outcomes among patients implanted with a leadless vs transvenous single-chamber ventricular pacemaker;Piccini;JAMA Cardiol,2021
4. Leadless vs. transvenous single-chamber ventricular pacing in the Micra CED study: 2-year follow-up;El-Chami;Eur Heart J,2022
Cited by
8 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献