Arrhythmias & electrophysiologyCohort study
Micra leadless pacemaker revisions: incidence, characteristics, and outcomes from a multicentre French cohort
- Retrospective cohort study
- multicentre
- 46 French centres
Authors' conclusion
LLP revisions are infrequent and predominantly managed without device removal.
Study context
- Population
- Patients with Micra leadless pacemakers implanted at 46 French centres, 2015–20238,994 Micra LLPs implanted
- Participants
- 100 patients
- Exposure
- LLP revision with device removal vs without removal
- Removaln = 30
- Without removaln = 70reference
- Outcome
- Incidence, characteristics and outcomes of LLP revisions, with emphasis on feasibility and safety of removal
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
LLP revision incidence · median follow-up 229 (68.5-629.8) days
- Revision procedures among 8994 Micra LLPs implanted
- 100 (1.1%)
- Revisions managed without device removal
- 70
- Revisions involving removal
- 30
- Indication: device upgrade
- 55%
- Indication: high pacing threshold
- 33%
- Indication: battery depletion
- 3%
- Indication: ventricular arrhythmias
- 3%
- Indication: miscellaneous causes
- 6%
Observational data: associations, not effects.
Further findings
Time to revision
P < 0.001
- Time to revision — Revisions occurring within 1 year
- 80%
Safety
- Device removal success and complications
- 97%
Original publication
Micra leadless pacemaker revisions: incidence, characteristics, and outcomes from a multicentre French cohort. Europace. Published 11 November 2025. doi:10.1093/europace/euaf291
Summarised from the published abstract; every number is checked against it