Elsevier

International Journal of Cardiology

Volume 323, 15 January 2021, Pages 113-117
International Journal of Cardiology

Assessment of injury current during leadless pacemaker implantation

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2020.08.098Get rights and content

Highlights

  • A local injury current can be observed during leadless pacemaker implantation

  • It’s presence is associated with impaired ventricular sensing and capture threshold at implantation, but improves over time

  • This observation is relevant because unnecessary device repositioning could be avoided

Abstract

Background

Leadless pacemakers are an established treatment option for bradyarrhythmias. Similar to conventional transvenous pacemakers, satisfying pacing values during implantation are targeted for optimal long-term device function. The objective is to investigate the role of a local injury current (IC) in leadless pacemaker implantations.

Method

The IC, sensing value, capture threshold and impedance were collected in 30 consecutive patients receiving a leadless pacemaker.

Results

39 EGMs were recorded from 30 patients (including 9 device repositions). An IC was detected in 15 cases (38%). At implantation, the presence of an IC was associated with a significantly lower sensing (7.1 ± 3.7 mV vs 12.0 ± 4.0 mV; P = 0.004) and a higher capture threshold (median threshold 1.13 V at 0.24 ms [0.50–2.00] vs 0.50 V at 0.24 ms [0.25–0.75]; P = 0.002) and with a 26 fold higher likelihood of device repositioning compared to the absence of an IC (OR 26.3 [2.79–248], P < 0.001). Patients with an IC in their final implant position had a lower sensing (9.3 ± 4.4 mV vs 13.6 ± 4.7 mV at implantation, P = 0.04), while the initially similar capture threshold was lower after 24 h in the IC group. After 2 weeks, all parameters were similar between the two groups.

Conclusions

Our study shows that an IC can readily be observed during leadless pacemaker implantation associated with a lower sensing and a higher capture threshold at implantation but with similar to even better values during follow-up.

Introduction

Since the first pacemaker implantation in 1958, pacemaker technology to treat bradyarrhythmias has rapidly advanced and nearly one million devices are being implanted each year worldwide [1,2]. Despite technical improvements, transvenous pacemaker systems are associated with potential peri- as well as postprocedural complications such as pneumothorax, cardiac perforation, and venous obstruction [3,4]. In addition, chronic damage to the leads and the inherent risk of infection may lead to increased morbidity over time [5]. These issues have triggered the development of leadless pacemaker systems. The most widely implanted leadless pacemaker, the Micra Transcatheter Pacing System (Micra TPS, Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN), has a capsule-shaped body which is implanted directly into the right ventricle to offer VVI(R) pacing. The safety and efficacy has been demonstrated in a non-randomized, prospective study [6] and was confirmed in large retrospective registries [7,8].

Conventional transvenous pacemaker leads may be anchored to the right ventricle passively using tines (passive fixation leads) or via active fixation by a helix which is screwed into the myocardium (active fixation leads). The placement of both types of leads is traumatic to the tissue and causes local injury known as the “injury current” (IC) [[9], [10], [11]]. The IC is recorded at the site of implantation and is represented by a prolongation of the intracardiac electrocardiogram (EGM) and an elevation of the ST segment. Retrospective studies have shown an association between the presence of an IC and stable lead placement [9,10]. In active-fixation leads, the IC may be clearly visible because the helix is part of the cathode of the electrode; however, ICs can also be recorded in passive-fixation leads likely due to the local cellular pressure damage during implantation [12].

The Micra TPS device is anchored to the right ventricle by four self-expanding nitinol tines which are hooked into the myocardium [6]. Adequate pressure of the delivery catheter onto the myocardium is mandatory for satisfactory device positioning. It is, however, unclear whether local damage to the myocardial tissue, and therefore an IC, can readily be observed shortly after implantation of a leadless pacemaker. The current study was therefore designed to investigate the presence and relevance of an IC during implantation of a Micra TPS leadless pacemaker system.

Section snippets

Study population

30 consecutive patients (26 patients at the University Hospital Zurich, 4 patients at the Cantonal Hospital Baden) undergoing 30 Micra TPS implantation between October 2019 and March 2020 in whom an intrinsic RV signal was assessable (excluding patients with complete AV block and no escape rhythm) were included. The study was approved by the local ethics committee (KEK-ZH-NR: 2020–00811). All enrolled patients provided written informed consent. The Micra TPS pacemaker was implanted according to

Study population and baseline characteristics

The mean age at implantation was 78 ± 12 years and 70% of the population were male (Table 1). Underlying cardiopathy was coronary artery disease in 30% of patients with an average left ventricular ejection fraction of 59 ± 8%. The underlying conduction abnormality resulting in device implantation was bradycardic atrial fibrillation or atrial fibrillation with complete atrioventricular block in 30% and sick sinus syndrome in 40% of the patients. 40% of the patients had experienced at least one

Discussion

The main observations from this study of 30 consecutive patients undergoing a routine Micra TPS implantation are:

  • 1)

    An injury current (IC) can be recorded in more than one-third of patients during the intervention.

  • 2)

    Its presence has an impact on the likelihood of immediate device repositioning due to higher initial capture thresholds.

  • 3)

    Clinically relevant device parameters like sensing and capture thresholds are similar at 2 weeks follow-up independent of the presence or absence of an IC at

Disclosures

AB has received consultant and/or speaker fees from Abbott, Bayer Healthcare, Biosense Webster, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cook Medical, Daiichi Sankyo, Medtronic, Pfizer, and Spectranetics/Philipps.

AMS has received educational grant from Abbott, Bayer Healthcare, Biotronik, Biosense Webster, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and Pfizer. He reports stock of Gilead Sciences.

DH has received educational grants, speaker fees or fellowship support from

Funding sources

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Aknowledgements

None.

References (17)

There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (2)

  • Leadless transcatheter pacemaker: Indications, implantation technique and peri-procedural patient management in the Italian clinical practice

    2022, International Journal of Cardiology
    Citation Excerpt :

    In line with the findings of previous experiences [30], our results confirm that even in a real world setting the implantation success rate of the L-PM is very high. The observed procedural times were in line with those reported in previous studies [11,12,17,31,32]. In addition, our findings confirmed a fast-learning curve regarding implantation and fluoroscopy [31], with a significant reduction in the duration of the procedure after the first 10 procedures.

View full text