The effects of local steroid-elution on high-performance pacing leads

Pacemaker Implantation Associated Myocardial Micro-Damage: A Randomised Comparison between Active and Passive Fixation Leads

Fixation of the pacemaker leads during pacemaker implantation leads to an increase of cardiac Troponin T (cTnT) that can be interpreted as a sign of minimal myocardial damage. This trial evaluates whether the mechanism type of lead fixation influences the magnitude of cTnT release. Patients having a de-novo cardiac pacemaker implantation or a lead revision were centrally randomized to receive either a ventricular lead with an active (screw) or passive (tine) fixation mechanism. High-sensitive Troponin T (hsTnT) was determined on the day of the procedure beforehand and on the following day. 326 Patients (median age (IQR) 75.0 (69.0–80.0) years, 64% male) from six international centers were randomized to receive ventricular leads with an active (n = 166) or passive (n = 160) fixation mechanism. Median (IQR) hsTnT levels increased by 0.009 (0.004–0.021) ng/ml in the group receiving screw-in ventricular leads and by 0.008 (0.003–0.030) ng/ml in the group receiving tined ventricular leads (n.s.). In conclusion pacemaker implantations are followed by a release of hsTnT. The choice between active or passive fixation ventricular leads does not have a significant influence on the extent of myocardial injury and the magnitude of hsTnT release.

Long-Term Complication Rates in Ventricular, Single Lead VDD, and Dual Chamber Pacing

A higher incidence of pacemaker related complications has been reported in DDD systems as compared to VVI devices. The implantation of single lead VDD pacemakers might reduce the complication rate of physiological pacing in patients with AV block. In a retrospective study, the data records of 1,214 consecutive patients with pacemaker implantation for AV block between 1990 and 2001 (VVI 36.5%, DDD 32.9%, VDD 30.6%) were analyzed. Complications requiring surgical interventions were compared during a follow-up period of 64 +/- 31 months. Operation and fluoroscopic times were longer in DDD pacemaker implantation compared to VDD and VVI devices:58 +/- 23 versus 39 +/- 10 and 37 +/- 13 minutes (P<0.001), 9.2 +/- 5.2 versus 4.1 +/- 2.4 and 3.5 +/- 2.3 minutes, respectively. Differences remained significant after correction for covariates. In a multivariate Cox regression model, the corrected complication hazard of a DDD pacemaker implantation was increased by 3.9 (1.4-11.3) compared to VVI and increased by 2.3 (1.1-4.5) compared to VDD pacing. Higher complication rates in DDD pacing were mainly due to a higher incidence of early reoperation for atrial lead dysfunction, whereas the long-term complication rate was not different from VDD or VVI pacing. Early and long-term complication rates did not differ between VDD and VVI pacemaker systems. In conclusion, operation time and complication rates of physiological pacing are reduced by VDD pacemaker implantation achieving values comparable to VVI pacing. Thus, single lead VDD pacing can be recommended for patients with AV block.