From the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (V.Y.R., S.R.D.) and Weill Cornell Medical Center (J.E.I.) - both in New York; Libin Cardiovascular Institute of Alberta, Calgary, Canada (D.V.E.); Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland (D.J.C.); Keck Hospital of University of Southern California, Los Angeles (R.D.), and Premier Cardiology, Newport Beach (R.B.) - both in California; Intermountain Medical Center Heart Institute, Salt Lake City, (T.J.B.); Central Baptist Hospital, Lexington, KY (G.F.T.); Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN (P.A.F.); Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston (N.A.M.E.); Sparrow Clinical Research Institute, Lansing, MI (J.I.); Aurora Medical Group, Milwaukee (I.N.); Naples Community Hospital, Naples, FL (K.P.); and Methodist University Hospital, Memphis, TN (J.P.).
N Engl J Med. 2015 Sep 17;373(12):1125-35. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1507192. Epub 2015 Aug 30.
Cardiac pacemakers are limited by device-related complications, notably infection and problems related to pacemaker leads. We studied a miniaturized, fully self-contained leadless pacemaker that is nonsurgically implanted in the right ventricle with the use of a catheter.
In this multicenter study, we implanted an active-fixation leadless cardiac pacemaker in patients who required permanent single-chamber ventricular pacing. The primary efficacy end point was both an acceptable pacing threshold (≤2.0 V at 0.4 msec) and an acceptable sensing amplitude (R wave ≥5.0 mV, or a value equal to or greater than the value at implantation) through 6 months. The primary safety end point was freedom from device-related serious adverse events through 6 months. In this ongoing study, the prespecified analysis of the primary end points was performed on data from the first 300 patients who completed 6 months of follow-up (primary cohort). The rates of the efficacy end point and safety end point were compared with performance goals (based on historical data) of 85% and 86%, respectively. Additional outcomes were assessed in all 526 patients who were enrolled as of June 2015 (the total cohort).
The leadless pacemaker was successfully implanted in 504 of the 526 patients in the total cohort (95.8%). The intention-to-treat primary efficacy end point was met in 270 of the 300 patients in the primary cohort (90.0%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 86.0 to 93.2, P=0.007), and the primary safety end point was met in 280 of the 300 patients (93.3%; 95% CI, 89.9 to 95.9; P<0.001). At 6 months, device-related serious adverse events were observed in 6.7% of the patients; events included device dislodgement with percutaneous retrieval (in 1.7%), cardiac perforation (in 1.3%), and pacing-threshold elevation requiring percutaneous retrieval and device replacement (in 1.3%).
The leadless cardiac pacemaker met prespecified pacing and sensing requirements in the large majority of patients. Device-related serious adverse events occurred in approximately 1 in 15 patients. (Funded by St. Jude Medical; LEADLESS II ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02030418.).
心脏起搏器受到器械相关并发症的限制,尤其是感染和与起搏器导联相关的问题。我们研究了一种微型化、完全独立的无导线起搏器,它可以通过导管非手术植入右心室。
在这项多中心研究中,我们为需要永久性单腔心室起搏的患者植入了主动固定无导线心脏起搏器。主要疗效终点是 6 个月时可接受的起搏阈值(≤2.0V,0.4ms)和可接受的感知幅度(R 波≥5.0mV,或等于或大于植入时的值)。主要安全性终点是 6 个月时无器械相关严重不良事件。在这项正在进行的研究中,对完成 6 个月随访的前 300 例患者(主要队列)的数据进行了主要终点的预设分析。疗效终点和安全性终点的发生率分别与 85%和 86%的预期性能目标(基于历史数据)进行了比较。截至 2015 年 6 月,所有 526 例入组患者的其他结果均进行了评估(总队列)。
在总队列的 526 例患者中,504 例(95.8%)成功植入了无导线起搏器。主要队列的 300 例患者中,270 例(90.0%;95%置信区间[CI],86.0 至 93.2,P=0.007)达到意向治疗主要疗效终点,300 例患者中 280 例(93.3%;95%CI,89.9 至 95.9;P<0.001)达到主要安全性终点。6 个月时,6.7%的患者出现器械相关严重不良事件;事件包括经皮取出的器械移位(1.7%)、心脏穿孔(1.3%)和起搏阈值升高需经皮取出和更换器械(1.3%)。
无导线心脏起搏器在绝大多数患者中满足了预设的起搏和感知要求。约 15 分之一的患者发生器械相关严重不良事件。(由圣犹达医疗公司资助;LEADLESS II ClinicalTrials.gov 编号,NCT02030418。)