Aller au contenu principal
Accès ouvert déclaré 2025 article

Micra leadless pacemaker revisions: incidence, characteristics, and outcomes from a multicentre French cohort

6Citations signalées, ce qui n’est pas une note de qualité
40Institutions déclarées
4Pays d’affiliation déclarés

Rattachement africain : fr, it, us, be. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.

Le résumé fourni par la source

AIMS: Leadless pacemakers (LLPs) offer a valuable option for selected patients requiring ventricular pacing. However, data on revision procedures-defined as any intervention on an implanted LLP to correct dysfunction or upgrade the system, with or without removal-remain scarce. This study aimed to evaluate the real-world incidence, characteristics, and outcomes of LLP revisions, with particular emphasis on the feasibility and safety of removal. METHODS AND RESULTS: This multicentre retrospective study involved 46 French centres performing LLP implantations between 2015 and 2023. Among 8994 Micra LLPs implanted, 100 revision procedures (1.1%) were performed in 100 patients, including 73 Micra VR and 27 Micra AV devices, at a median follow-up of 229 (68.5-629.8) days. Seventy revisions were managed without device removal, while 30 involved removal. Revision indications included device upgrade (55%), high pacing threshold (33%), battery depletion (3%), ventricular arrhythmias (3%), and miscellaneous causes (6%). No significant differences were observed in pacing indications, implantation characteristics, or initial device indication between the two groups. Revisions occurred significantly earlier in the removal group than in the group without removal [median 81.5 (8-211.5) days, vs. 334 (130.25-882.5) days, P < 0.001], with 80% occurring within 1 year. Device removal was successful in 97% of cases (one failure at 157 days of follow-up), with no major complications reported. CONCLUSION: LLP revisions are infrequent and predominantly managed without device removal. However, given the high procedural success rate and the low complication rate, device removal appears to be underutilized and should be considered more frequently on a case-by-case basis.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.

Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert

DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.

Titre Crossref
Micra leadless pacemaker revisions: incidence, characteristics, and outcomes from a multicentre French cohort
Date Crossref
11/11/2025
Éditeur
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Type
journal-article

Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.

Les institutions déclarées

Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.

Les sujets associés

Cardiac pacing and defibrillation studiesCardiac Valve Diseases and TreatmentsCardiac Arrhythmias and Treatments

BNTIC News n’est pas le producteur de ces données. Les publications sont interrogées à la demande dans Crossref, OpenAIRE, DOAJ, Europe PMC, HAL, DataCite, AfricArXiv, ROR et la Banque mondiale, sans clé d’accès. OpenAlex reste optionnel. Aucun service payant n’est nécessaire et aucune donnée externe n’est enregistrée en base. Consulter les sources et leurs limites.