Leadless Pacemaker Technologies: Patient Selection, Approach, and Outcomes
- 70 Downloads
Purpose of Review
Leadless cardiac pacemakers have recently entered clinical use for patients requiring single ventricular chamber pacing only. Two leadless systems have been utilized, the Nanostim leadless cardiac pacemaker and the Micra transcatheter pacing system. While currently limited to only a minority of pacemaker eligible patients, technical hurdles are expected to be overcome which will allow this technology to reach a much broader population. This review discusses the patient population for which these devices are indicated, the approach to device implantation and retrieval, and ongoing data on their long-term use.
Two major non-randomized clinical trials investigating the Nanostim and Micra leadless pacemaker systems were published in the New England Journal of Medicine in 2015 and 2016, respectively, with implant success rates of the active and passive fixation devices of 95.8 and 99.2%, respectively. The Nanostim and Micra demonstrated efficacy and safety, with major complication rates of 6.7 and 4% at 6 months, respectively, comparing favorably to historical transvenous pacemaker controls. Ongoing real-world registry data from Micra shows similar results, whereas Nanostim implantations have been halted due to an unexpected battery malfunction alert in late 2016. More data on device retrieval has become available, along with other strategies for end-of-life management.
Leadless pacemakers have emerged in clinical use based on their clinical outcomes and safety profile. These devices are expected to further revolutionize the field of cardiac pacing.
KeywordsLeadless pacemakers Outcomes Patient selection Techniques
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
Dr. Koene declared no conflict of interest. Dr. Cantillon reported consulting for Boston Scientific Corporation and Abbott Laboratories; membership on advisory committees for Boston Scientific Corporation and Abbott Laboratories; and teaching/speaking for Boston Scientific Corporation.
Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent
This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the author.
Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance
- 3.• Cantillon DJ, Exner DV, Badie N, Davis K, Gu NY, Nabutovsky Y, et al. Complications and health care costs associated with transvenous cardiac pacemakers in a nationwide assessment. JACC Clin Electrophysiol Elsevier. 2017;3:1296–305. This study provides real-world claims data suggesting that transvenous pacemaker complicatons are more common than previously reported, affecting nearly 1 in 6 patients by 3 years and contributing to incremental US health care cost. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 4.•• Reddy VY, Exner DV, Cantillon DJ, Doshi R, Bunch TJ, Tomassoni GF, et al. Percutaneous implantation of an entirely intracardiac leadless pacemaker. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:1125–35. This is the first major non-randomized clinical trial investigating the Nanostim leadless pacemaker, reporting 6-month implant success rates of 95.8% and major complication rates of 6.7%. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 5.•• Reynolds D, Duray GZ, Omar R, Soejima K, Neuzil P, Zhang S, et al. A leadless intracardiac transcatheter pacing system. N Engl J Med Mass Med Soc. 2016;374:533–41. This is the first major non-randomized clinical trial investigating the Micra leadless pacemaker, reporting 6-month implant success rates of 99.2% and major complication rates of 4%. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.Auricchio A, Delnoy P-P, Butter C, Brachmann J, Van Erven L, Spitzer S, et al. Feasibility, safety, and short-term outcome of leadless ultrasound-based endocardial left ventricular resynchronization in heart failure patients: results of the Wireless Stimulation Endocardially for CRT (WiSE-CRT) study. Europace. 2014;16:681–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 12.De Regibus V, Moran D, Chierchia GB, Brugada P, de Asmundis C. Leadless pacing in a young patient with cardioinhibitory vasovagal syncope. Indian Pacing Electrophysiol J Elsevier. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipej.2017.12.003
- 14.Wilkoff BL, Kennergren C, Love CJ, Kutalek SP, Epstein LM, Carrillo R. Bridge to surgery: best practice protocol derived from early clinical experience with the bridge occlusion balloon. Federated agreement from the eleventh annual lead management symposium. Hearth Rhythm Elsevier. 2017;14:1574–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 15.Olgun H, Karagoz T, Celiker A, Ceviz N. Patient- and lead-related factors affecting lead fracture in children with transvenous permanent pacemaker. Eur Oxf Univ Press. 2008;10:844–7.Google Scholar
- 17.Lloyd MS, El-Chami MF, Nilsson KR, Cantillon DJ. Hands-On: transcatheter/leadless pacing. Hearth Rhythm. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2017.12.004
- 23.Piccini JP, Stromberg K, Jackson KP, Laager V, Duray GZ, El-Chami M, et al. Long-term outcomes in leadless Micra transcatheter pacemakers with elevated thresholds at implantation: results from the Micra Transcatheter Pacing System Global Clinical Trial. Hearth Rhythm. 2017;14:685–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar