Arrhythmias & electrophysiologyCohort study
Comparison of in-hospital outcomes and complications of leadless pacemaker and traditional transvenous pacemaker implantation
- Retrospective cohort study
- national inpatient database
- multivariable logistic regression
- 1:1 propensity score matching
Authors' conclusion
There is a higher likelihood of all-cause in-hospital mortality and complications following LPM implantation in comparison to TV-VVI.
Study context
- Population
- Adults undergoing leadless or single-chamber transvenous pacemaker implantation, US national inpatient database, 2016–2019expanded samples of admissions
- Participants
- Thirty-five thousand four hundred thirty adults
- Exposure
- Leadless pacemakers (LPM) vs TV-VVI
- LPMn = 7,780
- TV-VVIn = 27,650reference
- Outcome
- Procedural complications and in-hospital outcomes
- Follow-up
- In-hospital
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
In-hospital outcomes and complications
LPM vs TV-VVIAdjusted odds ratio (95% CI)P value
in-hospital mortality
1.63(1.29–2.05)
P < 0.001vascular complications
7.54(3.21–17.68)
P < 0.001VTE
3.67(2.68–5.02)
P < 0.001cardiac complications
1.79(1.59–2.03)
P < 0.001device thrombus formation
5.03(2.55–9.92)
P < 0.001blood transfusion
1.54(1.14–2.07)
P < 0.005pulmonary complications (higher with TV-VVI)
0.68(0.54–0.87)
P < 0.002device revisions (higher with TV-VVI)
0.42(0.23–0.76)
P < 0.004Observational data: associations, not effects.
Original publication
Comparison of in-hospital outcomes and complications of leadless pacemaker and traditional transvenous pacemaker implantation. Europace. Published 15 September 2023. doi:10.1093/europace/euad269
Summarised from the published abstract; every number is checked against it