Efficacy and safety of leadless pacemaker: A systematic review, pooled analysis and meta-analysis

Leadless pacemakers have been designed as an alternative to transvenous systems which avoid some of the complications associated with transvenous devices. We aim to perform a systematic review of the literature to report the safety and efficacy findings of leadless pacemakers.

We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE to identify studies reporting the safety, efficacy and outcomes of patients implanted with a leadless pacemaker. The pooled rate of adverse events was determined and random-effects meta-analysis was performed to compare rates of adverse outcomes for leadless compared to transvenous pacemakers.

A total of 18 studies were included with 2496 patients implanted with a leadless pacemaker and success rates range between 95.5 and 100%. The device or procedure related death rate was 0.3% while any complication and pericardial tamponade occurred in 3.1% and 1.4% of patients, respectively. Other complications such as pericardial effusion, device dislodgement, device revision, device malfunction, access site complications and infection occurred in less than 1% of patients. Meta-analysis of four studies suggests that there was no difference in hematoma (RR 0.67 95%CI 0.21-2.18, 3 studies), pericardial effusion (RR 0.59 95%CI 0.15-2.25, 3 studies), device dislocation (RR 0.33 95%CI 0.06-1.74, 3 studies), any complication (RR 0.44 95%CI 0.17-1.09, 4 studies) and death (RR 0.45 95%CI 0.15-1.35, 2 studies) comparing patients who received leadless and transvenous pacemakers.

Leadless pacemakers are safe and effective for patients who have an indication for single chamber ventricular pacing and the findings appear to be comparable to transvenous pacemakers.