ArticleEuropace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology2024
Improved outcomes with leadless vs. single-chamber transvenous pacemaker in haemodialysis patients.
Article in 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, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cost-effectiveness of leadless versus transvenous single-chamber ventricular pacing: a propensity-weighted real-world study in France.Annals of medicine · 2026Article
- Long-Term Outcomes of Leadless Pacemaker vs. Transvenous Pacemaker in End-Stage Renal Disease.Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology · 2026Article
- Asymptomatic central venous occlusion secondary to central venous catheter-use complicating pacemaker implantation: a leadless solution.Oxford medical case reports · 2026Article
- [Leadless cardiac pacemaker : Overview, tips, and tricks].Herzschrittmachertherapie & Elektrophysiologie · 2025Review
- Micra leadless pacemaker revisions: incidence, characteristics, and outcomes from a multicentre French cohort.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 · 2025Article
- Comparison of readmission outcomes and complications between leadless and traditional transvenous pacemakers in older adults: a nationwide readmission analysis of 49852 admission events.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 · 2025Article
- Leadless vs. Transvenous Pacemakers in Patients with End-Stage Renal Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Pacemakers in Modern Cardiology and Their Transition From Traditional to Leadless Models.Cureus · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsCardiac conduction disorders are common in haemodialysis patients, with a relatively high rate of pacemaker implantations. Pacemaker-related complications, especially lead infections and central venous stenosis, pose significant challenges in this population. This study aims to compare single-chamber leadless pacemaker to single-chamber transvenous pacemakers in terms of survival and related complications in haemodialysis patients. METHODS AND
resultsThis retrospective study included adult haemodialysis patients who received a first single-chamber transvenous or leadless pacemaker between January 2017 and December 2020. Data were obtained from the French national REIN registry matched to the national health databases (Système National des Données de Santé). Propensity score matching was used to balance baseline characteristics. Survival and complications were compared between groups by Cox regression and by competitive risk models, respectively. One hundred and seventy-eight patients were included after propensity score matching, with 89 patients in each group. The median follow-up time was 24 (range 7-37) months. Leadless pacemakers were associated with significantly lower all-cause mortality rates compared to transvenous pacemakers [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.68, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.47-0.99)]. Device-related infections are significantly lower with leadless pacemakers throughout the follow-up period (HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.21-0.86). Leadless pacemaker recipients also required fewer vascular access interventions [odds ratio 0.53, 95% CI (0.33-0.68)] on arteriovenous fistula.
conclusionWith the limitations of its observational design, this study suggests that leadless pacemakers are associated with a lower rate of complications and better survival as compared with transvenous VVI pacemakers in haemodialysis patients, supporting to consider their preferential use in this population.
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.