Conventional single-chamber pacemakers versus transcatheter pacing systems in a “real world” cohort of patients: A comparative prospective single-center study

Purpose: Despite the developments in conventional transvenous pacemakers (VVI-PM), the procedure is still associated with significant complications. Although there are no prospective clinical trials that compared VVI-PM with transcatheter pacemaker systems (TPS). Methods: This is a prospective, obse...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Jose Luis Martinez-Sande, Javier Garcia-Seara, Laila Gonzalez-Melchor, Moises Rodriguez-Mañero, Aurora Baluja, Xesus Alberte Fernandez-Lopez, Jose Ramon Gonzalez Juanatey
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Elsevier 2021-03-01
Series:Indian Pacing and Electrophysiology Journal
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0972629220301674
Description
Summary:Purpose: Despite the developments in conventional transvenous pacemakers (VVI-PM), the procedure is still associated with significant complications. Although there are no prospective clinical trials that compared VVI-PM with transcatheter pacemaker systems (TPS). Methods: This is a prospective, observational, single-center study that included all patients with an indication for a single-chamber pacemaker implant within a 4-year period. All clinical, ECG and echocardiographic characteristics at implant, electrical parameters, associated complications and mortality were analyzed. A Cox survival model and a Bayesian cohort analysis were performed for differences in complication rates between groups. Results: There were 443 patients included (198 TPS and 245 VVI-PM). The mean age was 81.5 years (TPS group, 79.2 ± 6.6 years; VVI-PM group, 83.5 ± 8.9 years). There was a male predominance in TPS group (123, 62.1% vs. 67, 27.3%; p < 0.001). The presence of systolic dysfunction and renal insufficiency were more frequent in VVI-PM group than in TPS patients. Mean follow-up was 22.3 ± 15.9 months. In a multivariable paired data the TPS group presented fewer complications than VVI-PM group (HR = 0.39 [0.15–0.98], p-value 0.013), but major complications were not different (6, 3% vs 14, 5.6% respectively, p = 0.1761). There was no difference in the mortality rate between the groups. The TPS group had less risk than VVI-PM group to have a complication, with a 96% of probability. Conclusions: TPS patients had a lower overall complication rate than VVI-PM patients including matched-pair samples using a Bayesian analysis. These results confirm the safety profile of TPS in clinical practice.
ISSN:0972-6292