Szymon Warwas, Ewa Jędrzejczyk-Patej, Oskar Kowalski, Adam Sokal, Sławomir Pluta, Wiktoria Kowalska, Michał Mazurek, Radosław Lenarczyk, Zbigniew Kalarus, Beata Średniawa
{"title":"无导线起搏器与经静脉起搏器患者的生活质量。","authors":"Szymon Warwas, Ewa Jędrzejczyk-Patej, Oskar Kowalski, Adam Sokal, Sławomir Pluta, Wiktoria Kowalska, Michał Mazurek, Radosław Lenarczyk, Zbigniew Kalarus, Beata Średniawa","doi":"10.33963/v.phj.106688","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The transvenous pacemaker (PM) is a well-accepted device for advanced atrioventricular block and sick sinus syndrome, but it is associated with complications. Leadless pacemakers (LPM) offer a solution by eliminating transvenous leads and PM pocket, potentially improving outcomes. However, the impact of LPM on quality of life (QoL) remains understudied.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>To compare QoL of patients with leadless versus transvenous PMs.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Single-center prospective study included all comers with LPMs implanted between January 2016 and March 2022. A cohort of transvenous PM patients was matched to LPM subjects by age, sex, left ventricle ejection fraction, heart failure, atrial fibrillation and indication for the device implantation. All patients were requested to complete two standardized questionnaires: the 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) and the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ) 12 months after device implantation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Patients with LPMs (n = 31) and matched transvenous PM group (n = 31) did not differ regarding baseline characteristics. The median MLHFQ total score was 33.5 (0-88) for LPM and 21 (3-68) for PM group (P = 0.80). The median total score for the SF-36 questionnaire was 54 (8-140) vs. 35 (14-105) for LPM and PM, respectively (P = 0.86). No differences were found between leadless and transvenous PM subgroups, both for mental and physical QoL assessed in MLHFQ (6 [2-9.5] vs. 2 [0-6]; P = 0.08; 9.5 [2-19] vs. 7 [1-12]; P = 0.52, respectively) and in domains of SF-36.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>QoL after device implantation does not differ between patients with leadless and transvenous PMs.</p>","PeriodicalId":17784,"journal":{"name":"Kardiologia polska","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Quality of life in patients with a leadless pacemaker versus transvenous pacemaker.\",\"authors\":\"Szymon Warwas, Ewa Jędrzejczyk-Patej, Oskar Kowalski, Adam Sokal, Sławomir Pluta, Wiktoria Kowalska, Michał Mazurek, Radosław Lenarczyk, Zbigniew Kalarus, Beata Średniawa\",\"doi\":\"10.33963/v.phj.106688\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The transvenous pacemaker (PM) is a well-accepted device for advanced atrioventricular block and sick sinus syndrome, but it is associated with complications. Leadless pacemakers (LPM) offer a solution by eliminating transvenous leads and PM pocket, potentially improving outcomes. However, the impact of LPM on quality of life (QoL) remains understudied.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>To compare QoL of patients with leadless versus transvenous PMs.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Single-center prospective study included all comers with LPMs implanted between January 2016 and March 2022. A cohort of transvenous PM patients was matched to LPM subjects by age, sex, left ventricle ejection fraction, heart failure, atrial fibrillation and indication for the device implantation. All patients were requested to complete two standardized questionnaires: the 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) and the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ) 12 months after device implantation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Patients with LPMs (n = 31) and matched transvenous PM group (n = 31) did not differ regarding baseline characteristics. The median MLHFQ total score was 33.5 (0-88) for LPM and 21 (3-68) for PM group (P = 0.80). The median total score for the SF-36 questionnaire was 54 (8-140) vs. 35 (14-105) for LPM and PM, respectively (P = 0.86). No differences were found between leadless and transvenous PM subgroups, both for mental and physical QoL assessed in MLHFQ (6 [2-9.5] vs. 2 [0-6]; P = 0.08; 9.5 [2-19] vs. 7 [1-12]; P = 0.52, respectively) and in domains of SF-36.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>QoL after device implantation does not differ between patients with leadless and transvenous PMs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17784,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Kardiologia polska\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Kardiologia polska\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.33963/v.phj.106688\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kardiologia polska","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33963/v.phj.106688","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Quality of life in patients with a leadless pacemaker versus transvenous pacemaker.
Background: The transvenous pacemaker (PM) is a well-accepted device for advanced atrioventricular block and sick sinus syndrome, but it is associated with complications. Leadless pacemakers (LPM) offer a solution by eliminating transvenous leads and PM pocket, potentially improving outcomes. However, the impact of LPM on quality of life (QoL) remains understudied.
Aims: To compare QoL of patients with leadless versus transvenous PMs.
Material and methods: Single-center prospective study included all comers with LPMs implanted between January 2016 and March 2022. A cohort of transvenous PM patients was matched to LPM subjects by age, sex, left ventricle ejection fraction, heart failure, atrial fibrillation and indication for the device implantation. All patients were requested to complete two standardized questionnaires: the 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) and the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ) 12 months after device implantation.
Results: Patients with LPMs (n = 31) and matched transvenous PM group (n = 31) did not differ regarding baseline characteristics. The median MLHFQ total score was 33.5 (0-88) for LPM and 21 (3-68) for PM group (P = 0.80). The median total score for the SF-36 questionnaire was 54 (8-140) vs. 35 (14-105) for LPM and PM, respectively (P = 0.86). No differences were found between leadless and transvenous PM subgroups, both for mental and physical QoL assessed in MLHFQ (6 [2-9.5] vs. 2 [0-6]; P = 0.08; 9.5 [2-19] vs. 7 [1-12]; P = 0.52, respectively) and in domains of SF-36.
Conclusions: QoL after device implantation does not differ between patients with leadless and transvenous PMs.
期刊介绍：
Kardiologia Polska (Kardiol Pol, Polish Heart Journal) is the official peer-reviewed journal of the Polish Cardiac Society (PTK, Polskie Towarzystwo Kardiologiczne) published monthly since 1957. It aims to provide a platform for sharing knowledge in cardiology, from basic science to translational and clinical research on cardiovascular diseases.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
