Implantation of a leadless pacemaker in young adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Leadless pacing has emerged as an alternative to conventional transvenous pacemakers to mitigate the risks of pocket- and lead-related complications but its use remains controversial in young adults mostly because experience in this patient population is limited. We sought to examine the feasibility and safety of implanting leadless single chamber pacemakers in young adults. METHODS: This multicenter, retrospective, observational study sought to evaluate the safety, efficacy, and electrical performance of the Micra VR Transcatheter Pacemaker System (Medtronic) in patients between 18 and 40 years who underwent implantation of a leadless pacemaker for any indication at the university medical centers of Bordeaux, Clermont-Ferrand, Toulouse, and Tours (France), between 2015 and 2021. The primary safety endpoint was freedom from system-related or procedure-related major complications at 6 months. The primary efficacy endpoint was the combination of a low (≤2 V) and stable (increase within 1.5 V) pacing capture threshold at 6 months. RESULTS: Leadless pacemaker implantation was successful in all 35 patients. At 6 months, safety endpoint was met for 35 (100%) and efficacy endpoint for 34 (97%) patients. During a follow-up of 26 ± 15 months (range: 6-60 months), Safety endpoint remained 100% and efficacy endpoint was 94%. Leadless pacemaker retrieval was not required in any patient. Approximately one-third of patients (n = 13, 37%) had >40% ventricular pacing burdens at 1 year, including all 10 patients with a complete AV block but also 3 patients with normal AV conduction during implantation. One patient reported symptoms of pacemaker syndrome which was confirmed using Holter recording and successfully treated using reprogramming. CONCLUSION: In this observational study, leadless pacemakers demonstrated favorable short- and intermediate-term safety and effectiveness in young adults.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".