Quality of life in patients with a leadless pacemaker versus transvenous pacemaker.

BACKGROUND

The transvenous pacemaker (PM) is a well-accepted device for advanced atrioventricular block and sick sinus syndrome, but it is associated with complications. Leadless pacemakers (LPM) offer a solution by eliminating transvenous leads and the PM pocket, potentially improving outcomes. However, the impact of LPM on quality of life (QoL) remains understudied.

AIMS: To compare QoL of patients with leadless versus transvenous PMs.

MATERIAL AND

METHODS

This single-center prospective study included all comers with LPMs implanted between January 2016 and March 2022. A cohort of transvenous PM patients was matched to LPM subjects by age, sex, left ventricle ejection fraction, heart failure, atrial fibrillation, and indication for the device implantation. All patients were requested to complete two standardized questionnaires: the 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) and the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ), 12 months after device implantation.

RESULTS

Patients with LPMs (n = 31) and the matched transvenous PM group (n = 31) did not differ regarding baseline characteristics. The median MLHFQ total score was 33.5 (0-88) for the LPM and 21 (3-68) for the PM group (P = 0.80). The median total score for the SF-36 questionnaire was 54 (8-140) vs. 35 (14-105) for LPM and PM, respectively (P = 0.86). No differences were found between leadless and transvenous PM subgroups both for mental and physical QoL assessed in MLHFQ (6 [2-9.5] vs. 2 [0-6]; P = 0.08; 9.5 [2-19] vs. 7 [1-12]; P = 0.52, respectively) and in the domains of SF-36.

CONCLUSIONS

QoL after device implantation does not differ between patients with leadless and transvenous PMs.