Arrhythmias & electrophysiologyCohort study
Leadless atrial versus transvenous pacing for sinus node dysfunction: 1-year outcomes from the leadless ARRIVE real-world study
- Retrospective cohort study
- propensity score overlap weighting
- Medicare fee-for-service claims
Authors' conclusion
AVEIR AR was associated with fewer long-term complications and reinterventions compared with DCTV and RATV, while 1-year mortality remained similar.
Study context
- Population
- Medicare patients with de novo AVEIR AR leadless pacemakers (LP) or transvenous (TV) pacemaker implantation, January 2024 to March 2025
- Participants
- 428 / 39,881 / 389
- Exposure
- AVEIR AR leadless atrial pacemaker vs dual-chamber or right-atrial transvenous pacemakers
- AVEIR ARn = 428
- DCTVn = 39,881reference
- RATVn = 389reference
- Outcome
- 30-day complications and 1-year outcomes (complications, device-reinterventions, all-cause mortality)
- Follow-up
- 30 days and 1 year
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
Complications
AVEIR AR
6.7%
30-day complications vs DCTV (adjusted) · 30-day complications vs RATV 6.9% · 1-year complications vs DCTV 3.6% · 1-year complications vs RATV 3.3%
DCTV
9.4%
30-day complications (adjusted) · 1-year complications 8.5%
RATV
6.7%
30-day complications · 1-year complications 7.5%
- AVEIR AR vs DCTV · 30-day complications
- OR 0.7
- AVEIR AR vs DCTV · 1-year complications
- HR 0.4
- AVEIR AR vs RATV · 1-year complications
- HR 0.4
Observational data: associations, not effects.
Further findings
Device-related complications and reinterventions · 1 year
- Device-related complications reduced vs DCTV
- Reinterventions reduced vs both DCTV and RATV
All-cause mortality · 1 year
- Mortality comparable across all groups
Original publication
Leadless atrial versus transvenous pacing for sinus node dysfunction: 1-year outcomes from the leadless ARRIVE real-world study. Europace. Published 14 April 2026. doi:10.1093/europace/euag072
Summarised from the published abstract; every number is checked against it