ArticleJournal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing2021
Comparison between leadless and transvenous single-chamber pacemaker therapy in a referral centre for lead extraction.
Article in Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of Postoperative Outcomes between Leadless and Conventional Transvenous Pacemakers Implantation: An Up-to-Date Meta-analysis.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Pooled it
- The Effectiveness and Safety of Leadless Pacemakers: An Updated Meta-Analysis.Current cardiology reports · 2024Pooled it
- Comparative assessment of safety with leadless pacemakers compared to transvenous pacemakers: a systemic review and meta-analysis.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2023Pooled it
- Cost-effectiveness of leadless versus transvenous single-chamber ventricular pacing: a propensity-weighted real-world study in France.Annals of medicine · 2026Article
- Leadless vs. Transvenous Pacemakers in Patients with End-Stage Renal Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Co-presence of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator and leadless pacemaker in high-risk infection patients: are we out of the woods?Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2025Article
- Comparative safety of transvenous and leadless pacemakers in patients with cardiovascular diseases: A meta-analysis study.Heliyon · 2025Article
- Improved outcomes with leadless vs. single-chamber transvenous pacemaker in haemodialysis patients.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2024Article
- Ventricular lead malfunction in a patient with complete atrioventricular block and corrected transposition of the great arteries: Is leadless pacemaker the best solution?Journal of cardiology cases · 2024Article
- Optimizing cardiac device management: Leadless pacemaker implantation together with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator lead in a diaphragmatic stimulation case.HeartRhythm case reports · 2024Article
- Comparison of Safety of Leadless Pacemakers and Transvenous Pacemakers: A Meta-Analysis.Cureus · 2023Review
- Comparison of in-hospital outcomes and complications of leadless pacemaker and traditional transvenous pacemaker implantation.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2023Article
- Rate and nature of complications with leadless transcatheter pacemakers compared with transvenous pacemakers: results from an Italian multicentre large population analysis.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2023Article
- Emerging Concepts on Infection of Novel Cardiac Implantable Devices.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Review
- Leadless pacemaker perforations: Clinical consequences and related device and user problems.Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology · 2022Article
- Efficacy and safety of leadless pacemaker: A systematic review, pooled analysis and meta-analysis.Indian pacing and electrophysiology journalReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of the study was to compare the long-term clinical and electrical performance of Micra leadless pacemaker with transvenous single-chamber pacemaker (TV-VVI PM) in a high-volume centre for transvenous lead extraction (TLE).
methodsOne-hundred patients (group 1) undergoing Micra implant were matched with 100 patients undergoing TV-VVI PM implant (group 2) by age, sex, left ventricular systolic ejection fraction and previous TLE.
resultsThe implant procedure was successful in all patients. In group 1, the procedure duration was lower than in group 2 (43.86 ± 22.38 vs 58.38 ± 17.85 min, p < 0.001), while the fluoroscopy time was longer (12.25 ± 6.84 vs 5.32 ± 4.42 min, p < 0.001). There was no difference about the rate of septal implant at the right ventricle (76% vs 86%, p = 0.10). Patients were followed-up for a median of 12 months. No acute and chronic procedure-related complication was observed in group 1, while we reported acute complications in seven patients (7%, p = 0.02) and long-term complications in three patients (3%, p = 0.24), needing for a system revision in 6 cases (6%, p = 0.038), in group 2. One systemic infection occurred in TV-VVI PM group. Electrical measurements were stable during follow-up in both groups, with a longer estimated battery life in group 1 (mean delivered energy at threshold at discharge: 0.14 ± 0.21 vs 0.26 ± 0.22 μJ, p < 0.001).
conclusionMicra pacemaker implant is a safe and effective procedure, with a lower rate of acute complications and system revisions compared with TV-VVI PM, even in a real-life setting including patients who underwent TLE.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.