Cardiology - Cardiac Arrhythmias Management Department, Clinique Pasteur, 45 Avenue de Lombez, 31076 Toulouse Cedex, France.
Department of Cardiology, Congenital Heart Disease and Electrotherapy, Silesian Medical University, Silesian Centre for Heart Diseases, Curie-Sklodowska Street 9, 41-800 Zabrze, Poland.
Europace. 2018 Mar 1;20(3):555-559. doi: 10.1093/europace/eux381.
The purpose of this European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) survey is to provide an overview of the current use of leadless pacemakers (LLPM) across a broad range of European centres. An online questionnaire was sent to centres participating in the EHRA Electrophysiology Research Network. Questions dealt with standards of care and policies used for patient management, indications, and techniques of implantation of LLPM. In total, 52 centres participated in the survey. Most (86%) reported using LLPM, although 82% of these centres implanted <30 LLPM devices during the last 12 months. Non-availability (36%), lack of reimbursement (55%), and cost of the device (91%) were factors limiting the use of LLPM. The most commonly reported indications for LLPM were permanent atrial fibrillation (83%), a history of complicated conventional pacemaker (87%), or an anticipated difficult vascular access (91%). Implantation of LLPM is perceived as an easy-to-do and safe procedure by most implanters (64%), while difficult or risky in 28%, and comparable to conventional pacemakers by only a few (8%). Local vascular complications were the most frequently reported major problems (28%), but a significant number of respondents (36%) have never encountered any issue after LLPM implantation. Although cost and reimbursement issues strongly influence the use of LLPM, most respondents (72%) anticipate a significant increase in device utilization within next 2 years.
这项欧洲心脏病学会(EHRA)调查的目的是提供广泛的欧洲中心使用无导线起搏器(LLPM)的概述。向参与 EHRA 电生理学研究网络的中心发送了在线问卷。问题涉及患者管理、植入 LLPM 的适应证和技术的护理标准和政策。共有 52 个中心参与了这项调查。大多数(86%)报告使用了 LLPM,但其中 82%的中心在过去 12 个月中植入了<30 个 LLPM 装置。无供应(36%)、缺乏报销(55%)和设备成本(91%)是限制 LLPM 使用的因素。LLPM 最常报告的适应证为永久性房颤(83%)、复杂传统起搏器史(87%)或预期血管通路困难(91%)。大多数植入者(64%)认为植入 LLPM 是一个简单且安全的过程,而 28%的植入者认为植入困难或有风险,只有少数(8%)的植入者认为与传统起搏器相当。局部血管并发症是最常报告的主要问题(28%),但相当一部分受访者(36%)在植入 LLPM 后从未遇到过任何问题。尽管成本和报销问题强烈影响了 LLPM 的使用,但大多数受访者(72%)预计在未来 2 年内设备利用率将显著增加。