Conventional single-chamber pacemakers versus transcatheter pacing systems at long-term follow-up

Abstract Background Leadless pacemakers systems (LPM), have demonstrated safety and efficacy at mid-long term follow-up. There are still issues that cannot be completely avoided with conventional transvenous pacemaker (VVI) such as infectious or pocket related complications in which LPM are clearly superior. Purpose The aim of the study was to compare the clinical and device performance between LPM and VVI in a one-center long-term follow-up. Methods This was a prospective, observational, one-center study. We include all patients with a single chamber pacemaker implantation from June 1 2015 to March 1 2022 to complete a long-term follow-up. All clinical, electrical and echocardiographic characteristics, including electrical parameters, complications and mortality, were described. Results We included 245 patients with VVI pacemakers and 315 LPM. Mean age was 79.6±6.6 in LPM and 83.5±8.9 y/o in VVI pacemakers. All clinical, electrical and echocardiographic characteristics are described in Table 1. Electrical parameters of LPM were stable at long-term follow-up. There were a total of 7 complications in LPM and 17 in VVI pacemakers (p=0.006). There were no significant differences between major complications but there were in minor complications as shown in Table 2. There were no significant differences in mortality between both groups, but there was one death related to endocarditis in a VVI pacemaker patient during the follow-up (40,3±10 months). Conclusions In our study, there were no significant differences in terms of mortality and major complications between LMP and VVI at long-term follow-up. We consider our study supports the results in favor of the safety and effectiveness of LPM in the long-term. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None.