Improved outcomes with leadless vs. single-chamber transvenous pacemaker in haemodialysis patients.

IF 7.9 1区 医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Europace Pub Date : 2024-11-01 DOI:10.1093/europace/euae257
Alexandre Panico, Adrien Flahault, Francis Guillemin, Emilie Varlet, Cécile Couchoud, Marc Bauwens, Eloi Marijon, Stéphane Roueff, Hélène Lazareth
{"title":"Improved outcomes with leadless vs. single-chamber transvenous pacemaker in haemodialysis patients.","authors":"Alexandre Panico, Adrien Flahault, Francis Guillemin, Emilie Varlet, Cécile Couchoud, Marc Bauwens, Eloi Marijon, Stéphane Roueff, Hélène Lazareth","doi":"10.1093/europace/euae257","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Cardiac 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.</p><p><strong>Methods and results: </strong>This 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.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>With 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.</p>","PeriodicalId":11981,"journal":{"name":"Europace","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11542626/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Europace","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/europace/euae257","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aims: Cardiac 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 results: This 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.

Conclusion: With 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.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
血液透析患者使用无引线经静脉起搏器与单腔经静脉起搏器相比疗效更佳。
目的:心脏传导障碍在血液透析患者中很常见,起搏器植入率相对较高。起搏器相关并发症,尤其是导联感染和中心静脉狭窄,给这一人群带来了巨大挑战。本研究旨在比较单腔无引线起搏器和单腔经静脉起搏器在血液透析患者中的存活率和相关并发症:这项回顾性研究纳入了在 2017 年 1 月至 2020 年 12 月期间首次接受单腔经静脉或无引线起搏器的成年血液透析患者。数据来自与国家健康数据库(Système National des Données de Santé)相匹配的法国国家REIN登记处。采用倾向评分匹配法平衡基线特征。通过Cox回归和竞争风险模型分别比较了各组间的存活率和并发症发生率。经过倾向评分匹配后,共纳入 178 例患者,每组 89 例。中位随访时间为 24 个月(7-37 个月)。与经静脉起搏器相比,无引线起搏器的全因死亡率明显较低[危险比 (HR) = 0.68,95% 置信区间 (CI) (0.47-0.99)]。在整个随访期间,无导线心脏起搏器的器械相关感染率明显较低(HR 0.43,95% CI 0.21-0.86)。无引线起搏器接受者在动静脉瘘方面需要的血管通路干预也较少[几率比0.53,95% CI (0.33-0.68)]:尽管存在观察性设计的局限性,但本研究表明,与经静脉 VVI 起搏器相比,无引线起搏器在血液透析患者中的并发症发生率更低,存活率更高,因此可以考虑在这一人群中优先使用无引线起搏器。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Europace
Europace 医学-心血管系统
CiteScore
10.30
自引率
8.20%
发文量
851
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: EP - Europace - European Journal of Pacing, Arrhythmias and Cardiac Electrophysiology of the European Heart Rhythm Association of the European Society of Cardiology. The journal aims to provide an avenue of communication of top quality European and international original scientific work and reviews in the fields of Arrhythmias, Pacing and Cellular Electrophysiology. The Journal offers the reader a collection of contemporary original peer-reviewed papers, invited papers and editorial comments together with book reviews and correspondence.
期刊最新文献
Multielectrode Catheter-Based Pulsed Electric Field Versus Cryoballoon For Atrial Fibrillation Ablation: A Systematic Review And Meta-Analysis. Familial risk of sinus node dysfunction indicating pacemaker implantation: A nation-wide cohort study. Increased Pacemaker Implantation and Mortality Rates in Relatives of Patients with Early-Onset Sinus Node Dysfunction: Can Genetics Explain All? aTrial arrhythmias in inhEriTed aRrhythmIa Syndromes: results from the TETRIS study. Temperature guided high and very high-power short duration ablation for atrial fibrillation treatment - The peQasus multicentre study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1