Extraction of leadless and tranvenous pacemakers: occurrence, causes and complications from a national US database

Abstract Background Leadless pacemakers are usually implanted as second line treatment in patients with increased risk for infection, difficult or obstructed vascular access, and other causes preventing an implantation of a traditional pacemaker. Data regarding the occurrence and need for leadless pacemaker extraction (LLPE) are currently absent and have not been compared to outcomes of transvenous pacemaker extraction (TLE). Moreover, leadless pacemaker implantation during TLE for active infection in being advocated without backing data. We aimed to assess the rate, causes and complications of device extraction in a large US national database. Methods Patients undergoing LLPE and TLE in the USA between 2016 and 2019 were identified from the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database using ICD-10 codes. Clinical and sociodemographic data, in-hospital complications, outcomes and mortality were collected. Baseline characteristics and outcomes were compared between patients undergoing TLE and LLPE. Multivariate logistic regression identified predictors of in-hospital complications. Results An estimated total of 55,235 patients underwent an extraction procedure during the study period. 54,050 (97.8%) patients underwent TLE and 1,185 (2.1%) underwent LLPE. Patients who underwent LLPE were older, more likely females and had a higher comorbidity rate (Charlson-Deyo-Comorbidity-Index; 46% vs 39%, p<0.001). Etiology for LLPE was identified and reported only in 25.7% of cases, however infection causing extraction occurred in 11.4% of LLPE cases and 8% had LLPE due to device dysfunction. Main etiologies for TLE were infections (40.9%) and lead dysfunction (29.4%). In comparison to TLE, LLPE resulted in higher in-hospital mortality (7.2% vs. 3%, p<0.001) and vascular complications (2.5% vs. 1.0%, p<0.001). Multivariable analysis confirmed that LLPE was associated with more than double the risk of in-hospital mortality. Conclusion Extraction of leadless pacemakers due to infection is not rare. Patients undergoing LLPE have higher prevalence of vascular complications and in-hospital mortality in a US nationwide, all-comer registry.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
European Heart Journal
Published
2024-10-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehae666.745
Primary Topic
Cardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Extraction of leadless and tranvenous pacemakers: occurrence, causes and complications from a national US database

Eran Leshem‐Rubinow, Gilad Margolis, I.J. Poliner, Michael Bar‐Eli et al.
European Heart Journal
Cardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
article

Extraction of leadless and tranvenous pacemakers: occurrence, causes and complications from a national US database

Eran Leshem‐Rubinow, Gilad Margolis, I.J. Poliner, Michael Bar‐Eli, Mark Kazatsker, Ariel Roguin
article en

Abstract

Abstract Background Leadless pacemakers are usually implanted as second line treatment in patients with increased risk for infection, difficult or obstructed vascular access, and other causes preventing an implantation of a traditional pacemaker. Data regarding the occurrence and need for leadless pacemaker extraction (LLPE) are currently absent and have not been compared to outcomes of transvenous pacemaker extraction (TLE). Moreover, leadless pacemaker implantation during TLE for active infection in being advocated without backing data. We aimed to assess the rate, causes and complications of device extraction in a large US national database. Methods Patients undergoing LLPE and TLE in the USA between 2016 and 2019 were identified from the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database using ICD-10 codes. Clinical and sociodemographic data, in-hospital complications, outcomes and mortality were collected. Baseline characteristics and outcomes were compared between patients undergoing TLE and LLPE. Multivariate logistic regression identified predictors of in-hospital complications. Results An estimated total of 55,235 patients underwent an extraction procedure during the study period. 54,050 (97.8%) patients underwent TLE and 1,185 (2.1%) underwent LLPE. Patients who underwent LLPE were older, more likely females and had a higher comorbidity rate (Charlson-Deyo-Comorbidity-Index; 46% vs 39%, p<0.001). Etiology for LLPE was identified and reported only in 25.7% of cases, however infection causing extraction occurred in 11.4% of LLPE cases and 8% had LLPE due to device dysfunction. Main etiologies for TLE were infections (40.9%) and lead dysfunction (29.4%). In comparison to TLE, LLPE resulted in higher in-hospital mortality (7.2% vs. 3%, p<0.001) and vascular complications (2.5% vs. 1.0%, p<0.001). Multivariable analysis confirmed that LLPE was associated with more than double the risk of in-hospital mortality. Conclusion Extraction of leadless pacemakers due to infection is not rare. Patients undergoing LLPE have higher prevalence of vascular complications and in-hospital mortality in a US nationwide, all-comer registry.

European Heart JournalVol. 45(Supplement_1)
Technion – Israel Institute of Technology (IL), Hillel Yaffe Medical Center (IL)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 66%
Cardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.