El Amrani Amine, Campos Bieito, Alonso-Martín Concepción, Guerra-Ramos José M, Rodríguez-Font Enrique, Moreno-Weidmann Zoraida, Alcalde-Rodríguez Óscar, Méndez-Zurita Francisco J, Santaló Miguel, Espinosa-Viamonte Hildemari, Viñolas Xavier
Unidad de Arritmias, Servicio de Cardiología, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Instituto de Investigación Biomédica Sant Pau, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, CIBERCV, Barcelona, Spain.
Unidad de Arritmias, Servicio de Cardiología, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Instituto de Investigación Biomédica Sant Pau, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, CIBERCV, Barcelona, Spain.
Rev Esp Cardiol (Engl Ed). 2020 Apr;73(4):307-312. doi: 10.1016/j.rec.2019.06.001. Epub 2019 Aug 5.
The Micra transcatheter pacing system has shown high effectiveness and a lower complication rate than conventional transvenous pacemakers. However, the benefit of the device is unknown in the very old population (≥ 90 years). The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of Micra in patients ≥ 90 years.
We present a prospective observational study with consecutive patients aged >70 years who underwent implantation of a Micra pacemaker system. Patients were divided into 2 groups: ≥ 90 and<90 years.
The Micra system was implanted in 129 patients, of whom 41 were aged ≥ 90 years and 88<90 years. The device was successfully implanted in 40 (97.6%) patients ≥ 90 years and in 87 (98.9%) patients<90 years (P=.58). An adequate position was achieved with need for ≤ 2 repositions in 97.5% and 91.9% of patients, respectively (P=.32). Procedure time (26.1 ±11.6 vs 30.3 ±14.2minutes; P=.11) and fluoroscopy time (6.4 ±4.7 vs 7.2 ±4.9minutes; P=0.41) were similar in the 2 groups. There were 3 major complications (2.3%), all in the group aged<90 years: 1 cardiac perforation, 1 femoral hematoma, and 1 femoral pseudoaneurysm. Thirteen patients aged ≥ 90 years (31.7%) and 16 patients aged <90 years (18.2%) died during a mean follow-up of 230±233 days and 394±285 days, respectively. There were no device-related deaths. No infection, dislocation or migration of Micra were observed. The electrical performance was optimal at follow-up.
The Micra leadless pacing system seems to be safe and effective in patients older than 90 years. It may be considered a reasonable alternative to conventional transvenous pacing in this population.
Micra经导管起搏系统已显示出比传统经静脉起搏器更高的有效性和更低的并发症发生率。然而,该装置在高龄人群(≥90岁)中的益处尚不清楚。本研究的目的是评估Micra在≥90岁患者中的安全性和有效性。
我们进行了一项前瞻性观察性研究,纳入连续接受Micra起搏器系统植入的年龄>70岁的患者。患者分为两组:≥90岁组和<90岁组。
129例患者植入了Micra系统,其中41例年龄≥90岁,88例<90岁。≥90岁组40例(97.6%)患者和<90岁组87例(98.9%)患者的装置成功植入(P = 0.58)。分别有97.5%和91.9%的患者在≤2次重新定位后达到了合适的位置(P = 0.32)。两组的手术时间(26.1±11.6 vs 30.3±14.2分钟;P = 0.11)和透视时间(6.4±4.7 vs 7.2±4.9分钟;P = 0.41)相似。有3例主要并发症(2.3%),均发生在<90岁组:1例心脏穿孔、1例股部血肿和1例股部假性动脉瘤。在平均230±233天和394±285天的随访期间,≥90岁组13例患者(31.7%)和<90岁组16例患者(18.2%)死亡。无与装置相关的死亡。未观察到Micra感染、脱位或移位。随访时电性能最佳。
Micra无导线起搏系统在90岁以上患者中似乎是安全有效的。在该人群中,它可被视为传统经静脉起搏的合理替代方案。