Thomas Van Weyenbergh, Rik Willems, Gabor Vörös, Bert Vandenberk, Patricia Poels, Axel Dorrestijn, Christophe Garweg
{"title":"Incidence, Modifiable Risk Factors, and Management of Cardiomyopathy After Ventricular Leadless Pacemaker Implantation.","authors":"Thomas Van Weyenbergh, Rik Willems, Gabor Vörös, Bert Vandenberk, Patricia Poels, Axel Dorrestijn, Christophe Garweg","doi":"10.1016/j.hrthm.2026.10.022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Leadless ventricular pacemakers (LPM) provide only RV pacing, which may lead to pacing-induced cardiomyopathy (PICM). It is unclear whether LPM implant site or atrioventricular synchronous pacing using the Micra AV device influence PICM occurrence.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the incidence of cardiomyopathy after LPM implantation and explore the association of implant site and AV-synchronous pacing with cardiomyopathy risk and LVEF evolution.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This single-center retrospective study included 401 patients implanted with an LPM (Micra AV n=145) between July 2015 and March 2025. PICM was defined as cardiomyopathy (≥10% LVEF decline to <50%) in the presence of >20% ventricular pacing, where pacing was considered the primary cause. Risk factors for cardiomyopathy and LVEF evolution were assessed using Cox regression and mixed-effects modelling.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Over a median follow-up of 33.0 months, all-cause cardiomyopathy occurred in 13.6% (4.8%/year), while PICM was identified in 5.5% (1.9%/year). RVOT implantation was independently associated with a lower incidence of all-cause cardiomyopathy (HR 0.48, P=0.019), and a slower LVEF decline (-0.56%/year vs -1.43%/year, P=0.013) compared with mid-septal implantation. Device type (Micra AV vs VR) was not associated with clinical outcomes or LVEF evolution. Among patients developing cardiomyopathy, 92.7% were medically treated, with 57.9% achieving ≥10% LVEF improvement, and 36.8% complete recovery. CRT upgrade was uncommon (7.3%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Cardiomyopathy occurred in a substantial proportion of LPM recipients. RVOT implantation was associated with lower cardiomyopathy incidence and slower LVEF decline, whereas Micra AV implantation did not improve clinical outcomes. However, higher AV synchrony was linked to slower LVEF deterioration.</p>","PeriodicalId":12886,"journal":{"name":"Heart rhythm","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Heart rhythm","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2026.10.022","RegionNum":2,"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
Background: Leadless ventricular pacemakers (LPM) provide only RV pacing, which may lead to pacing-induced cardiomyopathy (PICM). It is unclear whether LPM implant site or atrioventricular synchronous pacing using the Micra AV device influence PICM occurrence.
Objective: To evaluate the incidence of cardiomyopathy after LPM implantation and explore the association of implant site and AV-synchronous pacing with cardiomyopathy risk and LVEF evolution.
Methods: This single-center retrospective study included 401 patients implanted with an LPM (Micra AV n=145) between July 2015 and March 2025. PICM was defined as cardiomyopathy (≥10% LVEF decline to <50%) in the presence of >20% ventricular pacing, where pacing was considered the primary cause. Risk factors for cardiomyopathy and LVEF evolution were assessed using Cox regression and mixed-effects modelling.
Results: Over a median follow-up of 33.0 months, all-cause cardiomyopathy occurred in 13.6% (4.8%/year), while PICM was identified in 5.5% (1.9%/year). RVOT implantation was independently associated with a lower incidence of all-cause cardiomyopathy (HR 0.48, P=0.019), and a slower LVEF decline (-0.56%/year vs -1.43%/year, P=0.013) compared with mid-septal implantation. Device type (Micra AV vs VR) was not associated with clinical outcomes or LVEF evolution. Among patients developing cardiomyopathy, 92.7% were medically treated, with 57.9% achieving ≥10% LVEF improvement, and 36.8% complete recovery. CRT upgrade was uncommon (7.3%).
Conclusion: Cardiomyopathy occurred in a substantial proportion of LPM recipients. RVOT implantation was associated with lower cardiomyopathy incidence and slower LVEF decline, whereas Micra AV implantation did not improve clinical outcomes. However, higher AV synchrony was linked to slower LVEF deterioration.
期刊介绍:
HeartRhythm, the official Journal of the Heart Rhythm Society and the Cardiac Electrophysiology Society, is a unique journal for fundamental discovery and clinical applicability.
HeartRhythm integrates the entire cardiac electrophysiology (EP) community from basic and clinical academic researchers, private practitioners, engineers, allied professionals, industry, and trainees, all of whom are vital and interdependent members of our EP community.
The Heart Rhythm Society is the international leader in science, education, and advocacy for cardiac arrhythmia professionals and patients, and the primary information resource on heart rhythm disorders. Its mission is to improve the care of patients by promoting research, education, and optimal health care policies and standards.