We read with interest the manuscript by Wu and Chen and we would like to comment on the surgical complications of intracardiac pacemaker implantation [1]. The use of permanent pacemakers (PPM) and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICD) is increasing due to the expansion of indications and aging of the population. As a consequence, cardiologists and cardiothoracic surgeons have to deal with a broad spectrum of complications, which are sometimes under-estimated and life-threatening. The surgical complications of PPM and ICD may occur during the immediate or early post-operative period and can be related to venous access process (pneumothorax, hemothorax, air embolism, haematoma, arterial puncture, wound healing problems, infection, pain), to the pacemaker lead (cardiac perforation, tamponade, malposition or dislodgement of the lead), or to the generator device. In addition, other complicationed that may occur during the late post-operative period are related to infections, thrombosis, endocarditis, pulmonary embolism, superior vena cava (SVC) syndrome (due to thrombus formation and/or fibrosis of the pacing wires within the SVC) and pericarditis [2-5]. Ostovan and Aslani have reported on the successful treatment of massive pulmonary air embolism during a PPM implantation with air suctioning by the guide catheter inserted into main pulmonary artery via the left femoral vein. Treatment for air embolisms includes oxygen treatment, haemodynamic support and prevention of further air entry in the systemic circulation. The left lateral decubitus position can prevent the air obstruction of the pulmonary outflow tract (air can be moved toward the right ventricular apex) [2]. Aggarwal et al. found no difference in the incidence of intraoperative and early postoperative complications (up to two months after implantation) between single and dual chamber pacing systems [3]. Sohail et al., in their retrospective review of 189 patients with pacemaker related infections, found out that the most common clinical presentations were generator pocket infection (69%) and device-related endocarditis (23%). The leading pathogens were Coagulase-negative Staphylococci and Staphylococcus aureus, in 42% and 29% of cases, respectively. There was a broad spectrum of related complications such us septic arthritis, sternal or vetebral or femoral osteomyelitis, and abscesses in lung, spleen, liver, brain and perinephric area. Twenty-two (11.6%) patients had thrombosis of the subclavian vein or superior vena cava and 6 of them developed clinical manifestations of pulmonary embolism. Ninety-eight percent of patients underwent complete device removal combined with antibiotic treatment and 96% of patients were treated successfully [4]. Nineteen patients had lead extraction via a median sternotomy and the rest underwent percutaneous lead extraction. Interventional complications were more common in patients with a history of multiple device-related procedures and were related to tricuspid valve failure, laceration of subclavian vein, hemothorax, haematoma, fracture of lead tip, ventriculotomy and bleeding [4]. Right atrial thrombosis and pulmonary embolism are infrequent complications (0.6%-3.5%) and its therapeutic modalities include anticoagulation, thrombolysis and or surgery [5]. In conclusion, the knowledge of all potential complications of the PPM/ICD and its multidisciplinary approach is very important for its prevention and definitive treatment. Conflict of interest: none declared