Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 7, 2025

Translational Rabbit Model of Chronic Cardiac Pacing
Published on: January 6, 2023
Patient Preferences for Features Associated With Leadless Versus Conventional Transvenous Cardiac Pacemakers
Shelby D Reed1,2, Jui-Chen Yang1, Matthew J Wallace1
1Duke Clinical Research Institute (S.D.R., J.-C.Y., M.J.W., J.S., F.R.J., S.O., S.M.A.-K.), Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC.
Background:
Regulatory approval of the first dual-chamber leadless pacemaker system provides patients an alternative to conventional transvenous pacemakers. The study objective was to quantify the preferences of patients for pacemaker features.
Methods:
Patients with a de novo (ie, initial) pacemaker indication were recruited from 7 US sites to complete a Web-based discrete-choice experiment survey between May 11, 2022, and May 24, 2023. Patients chose between pairs of experimentally designed, hypothetical pacemakers that varied according to type (removable leadless, nonremovable leadless, or conventional transvenous); battery life (5, 8, 12, or 15 years); time since regulatory approval (2 or 10 years); discomfort for 6 months (none or discomfort); and complication risk and infection risk (1%, 5%, or 10%/20% for each). Patients' choice data were analyzed using random-parameter logit models and latent-class analysis.
Results:
Among 117 participants, the mean (SD) age was 67.3 (14.6) years, 94% were white, and 42% were female. On average, patients' survey responses revealed a preference for removable leadless pacemakers (β, 0.340; SE, 0.096) over both nonremovable leadless pacemakers (β, -0.310; SE, 0.131; P=0.001) and conventional transvenous pacemakers (β, -0.030; SE, 0.119; P=0.031). However, latent-class analysis revealed 2 distinct preference classes. One class preferred leadless pacemakers (50.5%), and the other class preferred conventional transvenous pacemakers (49.5%). The conventional pacemaker class prioritized pacemakers with 10 rather than 2 years since regulatory approval (P<0.001), whereas the leadless pacemaker class was insensitive to years since regulatory approval (P=0.83). Complication risks and infection risks were found to be the most influential. All else equal, patients would accept maximum risks of complications or infections ranging about 5% to 18% to receive their preferred pacemaker type.
Conclusions:
Latent-class analysis revealed strong patient preferences for the type of pacemaker, with a nearly equal split between recent leadless pacemaker technology and conventional transvenous pacemakers. These findings can inform shared decision-making between health care providers and patients.
Registration:
URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT05327101.
More Related Videos
12:45Benefits of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy in an Asynchronous Heart Failure Model Induced by Left Bundle Branch Ablation and Rapid Pacing
Published on: December 11, 2017
16:40A New Single Chamber Implantable Defibrillator with Atrial Sensing: A Practical Demonstration of Sensing and Ease of Implantation
Published on: February 28, 2012