Revista espanola de cardiologia (English ed.) · 2016
The Micra Leadless Transcatheter Pacemaker. Implantation and Mid-term Follow-up Results in a Single Center.
СтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Martínez-Sande José Luis, García-Seara Javier, Rodríguez-Mañero Moisés, Fernández-López Xesús Alberte, González-Melchor Laila, Redondo-Diéguez Alfredo, González-Ferreiro Rocío, González-Juanatey José Ramón
Аннотация
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.
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.