{"title":"Evaluation of safety and feasibility of leadless pacemaker implantation following the removal of an infected pacemaker.","authors":"Jianghua Zhang, Long He, Qiang Xing, Xianhui Zhou, Yaodong Li, Ling Zhang, Yanmei Lu, Zukela Tuerhong, Xu Yang, Baopeng Tang","doi":"10.1111/pace.14346","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Leadless pacemakers provide safe and effective pacing options for patients with device-related infections. This study was aimed at observing and evaluating the safety and feasibility of extracting an infected pacemaker device followed by the implantation of a leadless pacemaker in the same location for patients without systemic infection.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Between December 2019 and September 2020, following a well-planned re-implantation strategy, pacemaker electrodes were removed from patients with device infection and leadless pacemakers were immediately implanted at our center. The patients were then followed up for up to 10 months to assess the safety and practicality of the procedure.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Pacemaker electrode removal and immediate leadless pacemaker implantation were successfully achieved in eight patients with pocket infection. After a minimum follow-up period of 1 month and a maximum follow-up of 10 months, the pacing parameters for the patients remained stable and there was no infection at the original capsular bag or in the leadless pacemaker.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Direct implantation of a leadless pacemaker is safe and feasible for patients with local infection of the pacing system after removal of the electrode as an alternative to a bridge period with a temporary pacemaker. This strategy may be a better option for pacing-dependent patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":520740,"journal":{"name":"Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE","volume":" ","pages":"1711-1716"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/pace.14346","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/pace.14346","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/9/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7
Abstract
Background: Leadless pacemakers provide safe and effective pacing options for patients with device-related infections. This study was aimed at observing and evaluating the safety and feasibility of extracting an infected pacemaker device followed by the implantation of a leadless pacemaker in the same location for patients without systemic infection.
Methods: Between December 2019 and September 2020, following a well-planned re-implantation strategy, pacemaker electrodes were removed from patients with device infection and leadless pacemakers were immediately implanted at our center. The patients were then followed up for up to 10 months to assess the safety and practicality of the procedure.
Results: Pacemaker electrode removal and immediate leadless pacemaker implantation were successfully achieved in eight patients with pocket infection. After a minimum follow-up period of 1 month and a maximum follow-up of 10 months, the pacing parameters for the patients remained stable and there was no infection at the original capsular bag or in the leadless pacemaker.
Conclusion: Direct implantation of a leadless pacemaker is safe and feasible for patients with local infection of the pacing system after removal of the electrode as an alternative to a bridge period with a temporary pacemaker. This strategy may be a better option for pacing-dependent patients.