Endocardial versus epicardial pacing in pacemaker-dependent patients after device extraction: a meta-analysis

Abstract

ABSTRACT Introduction Pacemaker-dependent (PM) patients with cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infection require implantation of a temporary-pacemaker (TP) and delayed endocardial reimplantation or implantation of an epicardial-pacing-system (EPI) before device extraction. Our aim was to compare the TP and EPI-strategy after CIED extraction through a meta-analysis. Methods We searched electronic databases up to 25 March 2022, for observational studies that reported clinical outcomes of PM-dependent patients implanted with TP or EPI-strategy after device extraction. Results 3 studies were included enrolling 339 patients (TP: 156 patients; EPI: 183 patients). TP compared to EPI showed reduction in the composite outcome of relevant complications (all-cause death, infections, need for revision or upgrading of the reimplanted CIED) (12.1% vs 28.9%; RR: 0.45; 95%CI: 0.25–0.81; p = 0.008) and a trend in reduction of all-cause death (8.9% vs 14.2%; RR: 0.58; 95%CI: 0.33–1.05; p = 0.07). Furthermore, TP-strategy proved to reduce need of upgrading (0% vs 12%; RR: 0.07; 95%CI: 0.01–0.52; p = 0.009), reintervention on reimplanted CIED (1.9% vs 14.7%; RR: 0.15; 95%CI: 0.05–0.48; p = 0.001) and significant increase in pacing threshold (0% vs 5.4%; RR: 0.17; 95%CI: 0.03–0.92; p = 0.04), with a longer discharge time (MD: 9.60 days; 95%CI: 1.98–17.22; p = 0.01). Conclusion TP-strategy led to a reduction of the composite outcome of all-cause death and complications, upgrading, reintervention on reimplanted CIED, and risk of increase in pacing threshold compared to EPI-strategy, with longer discharge time.