Outcomes of Micra Leadless Pacemaker Implants in Centers With and Without Cardiac Surgery

Micra leadless pacemaker offers an alternative to traditional transvenous pacemakers by eliminating the risks associated with leads and device pockets. Due to the technical demands of a leadless transcatheter pacemaker, concerns initially limited the procedure to centers with on-site cardiac surgery (CS) capabilities. However, growing evidence supports its safe implementation in noncardiac surgical centers, though data comparing outcomes in these settings remain limited.

This analysis aims to evaluate the safety and feasibility of Micra leadless pacemaker implantation in centers with and without CS, assessing acute complications, device performance, and patient follow-up.

A retrospective analysis was conducted on 1899 patients who received a Micra pacemaker from May 2015 to September 2024 at 23 centers. Patients were divided into two groups: those implanted in centers with CS (CS, n = 1025) and those without (No-CS, n = 874). The primary endpoint was acute complications within 15 days postimplant, while secondary endpoints included device performance and clinical follow-up at 12 months.

The overall acute complication rate was low at 0.6%, with no significant difference between the CS (0.5%) and No-CS groups (0.8%; p = 0.391). Procedural times were slightly shorter in No-CS centers (41.2 ± 19.8 vs. 46.1 ± 19.3 min; p < 0.001), and both groups showed comparable device performance and patient outcomes over the follow-up period.

The Micra leadless pacemaker can be safely and effectively implanted in centers without CS capabilities, broadening access to this technology across diverse clinical settings.