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 Cardiology2025
Micra leadless pacemaker revisions: incidence, characteristics, and outcomes from a multicentre French cohort.
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, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Outcomes of leadless pacing with the Micra VR beyond 10 years.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 · 2026Article
- Removal of tine-based leadless pacemakers: insights from a large multicentre experience.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 · 2026Article
- Lessons learned from Micra leadless pacemaker retrieval: a case series.European heart journal. Case reports · 2026Article
- Article
- Novel use of an atrial Aveir AR pacemaker implanted in the right ventricle for a pediatric patient with prolonged sinus pause.Indian pacing and electrophysiology journalArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
32 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsLeadless pacemakers (LLPs) offer a valuable option for selected patients requiring ventricular pacing. However, data on revision procedures-defined as any intervention on an implanted LLP to correct dysfunction or upgrade the system, with or without removal-remain scarce. This study aimed to evaluate the real-world incidence, characteristics, and outcomes of LLP revisions, with particular emphasis on the feasibility and safety of removal. METHODS AND
resultsThis multicentre retrospective study involved 46 French centres performing LLP implantations between 2015 and 2023. Among 8994 Micra LLPs implanted, 100 revision procedures (1.1%) were performed in 100 patients, including 73 Micra VR and 27 Micra AV devices, at a median follow-up of 229 (68.5-629.8) days. Seventy revisions were managed without device removal, while 30 involved removal. Revision indications included device upgrade (55%), high pacing threshold (33%), battery depletion (3%), ventricular arrhythmias (3%), and miscellaneous causes (6%). No significant differences were observed in pacing indications, implantation characteristics, or initial device indication between the two groups. Revisions occurred significantly earlier in the removal group than in the group without removal [median 81.5 (8-211.5) days, vs. 334 (130.25-882.5) days, P < 0.001], with 80% occurring within 1 year. Device removal was successful in 97% of cases (one failure at 157 days of follow-up), with no major complications reported.
conclusionLLP revisions are infrequent and predominantly managed without device removal. However, given the high procedural success rate and the low complication rate, device removal appears to be underutilized and should be considered more frequently on a case-by-case basis.
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.