A comparative analysis of the effectiveness of active versus passive atrial lead fixation in Chinese patients with cardiac implantable electrical devices: a long term, retrospective, observational, single-center study.

BACKGROUND: Data comparing active atrial lead fixation with passive atrial lead fixation in Chinese patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) for atrial pacing is limited. Our study evaluated the effectiveness of active fixation versus passive fixation of atrial leads by observing the lead performance parameters. METHODS: This retrospective, long-term, single-center study included a cohort of Chinese patients who underwent CIED implantation at the Department of Cardiology of People's Hospital of Yuxi City, China, from 1 March 2010 to 1 March 2015. Efficacy was determined by comparing implantation time, threshold values, incidence of lead dislocation/failure, and lead-related complications between the two groups. RESULTS: Of the 1217 patients, active and passive atrial lead fixation were performed in 530 (mean age, 69.37 ± 11.44 years) and 497 (mean age, 68.33 ± 10.96 years). The active fixation group reported significantly lower mean atrial implantation times (P = .0001) and threshold values (P = .044) compared with the passive atrial lead fixation group. In addition, threshold values in the active atrial lead fixation group were stable throughout the observation period. No instances of myocardial perforation, cardiac tamponade, implantation failure, or electrode dislocation/re-fixation were reported in the active atrial lead fixation group. A favorable decrease in patient comfort parameters such as bed rest time (P = .027) and duration of hospital stay (P = .038) were also observed in the active lead fixation group. CONCLUSION: Active atrial lead fixation demonstrated greater stability, steady long-term thresholds and minimal lead-related complications compared to passive lead fixation in Chinese patients with CIEDs.

Seven times replacement of permanent cardiac pacemaker in 33 years to maintain adequate heart rate: a case report.

Over the past few decades, recent developments in pacemaker technology from fixed-rate single-chamber pacemakers to dual chamber pacemakers with pacing algorithms have changed the therapeutic landscape resulting in better healthcare outcomes by improving rate response with minimal ventricular pacing. Here, we share our longest clinical experience with an elderly Chinese male patient who was diagnosed with third-degree atrioventricular (AV) block and was admitted in our hospital 33 years ago. An 85-year-old male patient from China was hospitalized due to dizziness and syncope, with an initial diagnosis revealing third-degree AV block with a heart rate of 35-40 beats per minute (bpm) along with Aase's syndrome and primary hypertension. A single-chamber pacemaker (VVI) was implanted immediately giving the patient symptomatic relief. However, 5-year post-surgery VVI was replaced due to battery exhaustion, while the primary electrode catheter was kept in use. Few years later, the patient again complained of dizziness and re-examination revealed VVI battery debilitation due to premature battery exhaustion. Single-chamber pacemaker was again implanted via the same position of right upper chest. However, after adjusting the frequency of stimulation of the pacemaker to 70 bpm, patient had a symptomatic relief. Considering the severity of patient's disease and knowing that cardiac dysfunction was reported previously, a tri-chamber pacemaker was chosen to take place of previous single-chamber pacemaker. For 33 years, the patient underwent 7 times replacement of pacemaker for battery exhaustion or inadequacy. We successfully performed overall seven pacemaker implantations and upgradation in an elderly Chinese patient diagnosed with third-degree AV block for 33 years. A long following up till now demonstrated no major complications with normal heart rate functioning.