Aims: Recent advances in miniaturization technologies and battery chemistries have made it possible to develop a pacemaker small enough to implant within the heart while still aiming to provide similar battery longevity to conventional pacemakers. The Micra Transcatheter Pacing System is a miniaturized single-chamber pacemaker system that is delivered via catheter through the femoral vein. The pacemaker is implanted directly inside the right ventricle of the heart, eliminating the need for a device pocket and insertion of a pacing lead, thereby potentially avoiding some of the complications associated with traditional pacing systems.

Methods And Results: The Micra Transcatheter Pacing Study is currently undergoing evaluation in a prospective, multi-site, single-arm study. Approximately 720 patients will be implanted at up to 70 centres around the world. The study is designed to have a continuously growing body of evidence and data analyses are planned at various time points. The primary safety and efficacy objectives at 6-month post-implant are to demonstrate that (i) the percentage of Micra patients free from major complications related to the Micra system or implant procedure is significantly higher than 83% and (ii) the percentage of Micra patients with both low and stable thresholds is significantly higher than 80%. The safety performance benchmark is based on a reference dataset of 977 subjects from 6 recent pacemaker studies.

Conclusions: The Micra Transcatheter Pacing Study will assess the safety and efficacy of a miniaturized, totally endocardial pacemaker in patients with an indication for implantation of a single-chamber ventricular pacemaker.

Clinicaltrialsgov Registration Id: NCT02004873.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/europace/euv026DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

micra transcatheter
16
transcatheter pacing
16
pacing study
12
safety efficacy
12
percentage micra
8
micra patients
8
micra
7
pacing
6
pacemaker
6
study
5

Similar Publications

Introduction: The advancement of medical technology has introduced leadless pacemakers (LPMs) as a significant innovation in cardiac pacing, offering potential advantages over traditional ventricular transvenous pacemakers. This report explores the application of LPMs in two patients with complex valvular histories, particularly those with mechanical tricuspid valves.

Case Reports: The first case involves a 60-year-old male with a history of rheumatic heart disease and triple valve replacement who developed a high-grade AV block.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: Achieving hemostasis of large bore venous access sites can be challenging and time consuming. Closure devices have proven to be superior in achieving hemostasis, reducing time to ambulation and improving patient comfort, compared to manual hemostasis techniques after femoral venous and arterial access. The closure of the jugular vein following large bore access has not been investigated in previous studies.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: Micra™ VR Transcatheter Pacing System (Micra VR) is a single-chamber transcatheter leadless pacemaker. Absence of leads and subcutaneous pocket reduces or completely eliminates the risk of complications associated with the conventional transvenous pacemakers (TVPM). When compared with TVPM, the leadless technology provides a quicker postimplantation recovery and causes less cosmetic concerns/discomfort providing better patient experiences in the long run.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

A comparison of procedure-related adverse events between two right ventricular leadless pacemakers.

J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol

December 2024

The Joseph F. Novogratz Family Heart Rhythm Science Center, Minneapolis Heart Institute Foundation, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.

Article Synopsis
  • - The study compares the safety and device-related issues of two leadless pacemakers in the U.S.: Medtronic Micra VR and Abbott AVEIR VR, focusing on major adverse clinical events (MACE) and device problems during 2022-2024.
  • - Approximately 6,000 AVEIR VR and 10,000 Micra VR implants were registered, with similar rates of MACE and serious procedural complications between the two, indicating comparable safety profiles.
  • - Despite similar safety outcomes, Micra VR had more cases requiring replacement due to unacceptable thresholds, while AVEIR VR experienced more significant device dislodgements, suggesting design-related differences.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!