Transvenous Compared With Leadless Pacemakers: A meta-analysis comparing TP versus LP

Shady Habboush,Ahmed Elmoursi,Ahmed F Gadelmawla,Amr T Masoud,Mohamed Khalil,Hesham Sheashaa,Nooraldin Merza,Ahmed T Massoud,Ahmed F. Gadelmawla,Amr T. Masoud,Ahmed T. Massoud
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/crd.0000000000000660
2024-02-01
Cardiology in Review
Abstract:This study aims to compare the effectiveness of leadless pacemakers (LPs) and transvenous pacemakers and to examine the safety of both methods. We included patients undergoing single-chamber pacemaker implantation, either LP or TVP. Our outcomes were successful implantation rate, major complication, vascular injury, tamponade, and pneumothorax. We performed a double-arm analysis comparing LP versus TVP, with risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval. A total of 10 studies were included in this meta-analysis. Regarding efficacy endpoints, RR revealed no significant difference between the LP and transvenous pacemaker groups in terms of successful rate of implantation (RR = 1.00; P = 0.77). Regarding safety outcomes, LP experienced lower incidence of major complications (RR = 0.47; P = 0.01), infection (RR = 0.24; P = 0.001), and tamponade (RR = 0.36; P = 0.01). There was no significant difference between both groups regarding pneumothorax (RR = 0.35; P = 0.22) and vascular injury (RR = 1.55; P = 0.25). The study findings suggest that both LPs and TVPs have similar effectiveness. Moreover, the incidences of pneumothorax, vascular injuries, and major complications were found to be comparable between the 2 methods. However, LPs were found to have lower rates of infection and tamponade.
cardiac & cardiovascular systems
What problem does this paper attempt to address?