Leadless vs. Conventional Transvenous Pacemakers in Valve Intervention Patients: A Systematic Review & Meta‐Analysis

In this meta-analysis, LP implantation was associated with reduced ventricular pacing burden, but at the expense of a longer hospital stay and increased mortality risk compared with conventional TVP. No significant differences were observed between the two modalities in terms of rehospitalization, pocket infection, lead/device dislodgement, and vascular complications. These findings suggest that although LP were associated with higher observed mortality, this association is likely driven by selection bias, as leadless devices are preferentially implanted in patients with higher baseline risk and greater comorbidity burden. Randomized controlled trials are needed to clarify the comparative safety of leadless versus TVP while minimizing confounding by indication.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology
Published
2026-02-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/pace.70148
Primary Topic
Cardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Leadless vs. Conventional Transvenous Pacemakers in Valve Intervention Patients: A Systematic Review & Meta‐Analysis

Ahmed Elkhouly, Tariq Saeed, Lina K. Awad, Ahmed Samy Gad et al.
Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology
Cardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
article

Leadless vs. Conventional Transvenous Pacemakers in Valve Intervention Patients: A Systematic Review & Meta‐Analysis

Ahmed Elkhouly, Tariq Saeed, Lina K. Awad, Ahmed Samy Gad, Omar Ashraf Eissa, Sara Mohammad Altaamreh
article en

Abstract

In this meta-analysis, LP implantation was associated with reduced ventricular pacing burden, but at the expense of a longer hospital stay and increased mortality risk compared with conventional TVP. No significant differences were observed between the two modalities in terms of rehospitalization, pocket infection, lead/device dislodgement, and vascular complications. These findings suggest that although LP were associated with higher observed mortality, this association is likely driven by selection bias, as leadless devices are preferentially implanted in patients with higher baseline risk and greater comorbidity burden. Randomized controlled trials are needed to clarify the comparative safety of leadless versus TVP while minimizing confounding by indication.

Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology
Kafrelsheikh University (EG), Hashemite University (JO), Alexandria University (EG), Assiut University (EG)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 69%
Cardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
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.

Leadless vs. Conventional Transvenous Pacemakers in Valve Intervention Patients: A Systematic Review & Meta‐Analysis — Ahmed Elkhouly, Tariq Saeed, et al. · Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS