Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Apr 15;33(1):61-70.
doi: 10.37616/2212-5043.1244. eCollection 2021.

Original Article--Outcomes of Pacing in Egyptian Pediatric Population

Affiliations

Original Article--Outcomes of Pacing in Egyptian Pediatric Population

Ahmed Nabil Ali et al. J Saudi Heart Assoc. .

Abstract

Objectives: Permanent pacemakers are widely used in the pediatric population due to congenital and surgically acquired rhythm disturbances. The diversity and complexity of congenital heart diseases make device management a highly individualized procedure in pediatric pacing. We are also faced with special problems in pediatric age group as growth, children's activity and infection susceptibility. This study aimed to present our institute's experience in pediatric and adolescent pacemaker implantation and long-term outcomes.

Methods: This cross-sectional observational study included 100 pediatric patients who visited our outpatient clinics at Ain Shams University Hospitals for regular follow up of their previously implanted permanent pacemakers. All patients were subjected to history taking, clinical examination, ECG recording, echocardiography and elaborate device programming. Data about device types, device components' longevity, subsequent procedures, complications were collected, with comparison between epicardial and endocardial pacemakers.

Results: Our study population ranged in age from 8 months to 18 years (mean 13.12 ± 5.04 years), 51 were males and 53 patients had congenital heart disease. Epicardial pacing represented 26% of our total population using only VVIR pacemakers, while endocardial pacing represented 74% of our population with 58.1% of them being VVIR pacemakers. First battery longevity was higher in endocardial batteries (108 months vs. 60 months, p value: 0.007). First lead longevity was also higher in endocardial leads (105 moths vs. 58 months, p value: 0.006). Complication rate was 25%; 8 patients had early complications (one insulation break in endocardial group). Late complications occurred in 17 patients (10 patients had lead fracture; 9 of them were endocardial, 2 insulation breaks in endocardial leads, 3 patients from epicardial group had lead failure of capture). In total, 16 patients had lead-related complications. There was no statistically significant difference between different lead models regarding lead-related complications.

Conclusion: Pacemakers in children are generally safe, but still having high rates of lead-related complications. Lead failure of capture was more common in epicardial leads. These complications had no relation to the model of the leads. Endocardial pacemakers showed higher first lead and first battery longevity compared to epicardial pacemakers.

Keywords: Endocardial pacing; Epicardial pacing; Pacing complications; Pediatric age; Permanent pacing.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of interests All authors have none to declare.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Types of congenital heart diseases. ASD: atrial septal defect, CAVC: common AV canal, D-TGA: dextro-transposition of great arteries, L-TGA: levo-transposition of great arteries, PDA: patent ducts arteriosus, TOF: Tetralogy of Fallot, VSD: ventricle septal defect.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Kaplan-Meier survival curves in endocardial versus epicardial pacemakers’ batteries (Log-rank chi-squared = 15.408, df = 1, p-value = 0.007*).
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Kaplan-Meier survival curves in endocardial versus epicardial ventricular leads (Log-rank chi-squared = 18.965, df = 1, p-value = 0.006*).

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Cohen MI, Bush DM, Vetter VL, Tanel RE, Wieand TS, Gaynor JW, et al. Permanent epicardial pacing in pediatric patients: seventeen years of experience and 1200 outpatient visits. Circulation. 2001 May 29;103(21):2585–90. doi: 10.1161/01.cir.103.21.2585. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kammeraad JA, Rosenthal E, Bostock J, Rogers J, Sreeram N. Endocardial pacemaker implantation in infants weighing < or = 10 kilograms. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2004 Nov;27(11):1466–74. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.2004.00663.x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kerstjens-Frederikse MW, Bink-Boelkens MT, de Jongste MJ, Homan van der Heide JN. Permanent cardiac pacing in children: morbidity and efficacy of follow-up. Int J Cardiol. 1991 Nov;33(2):207–14. doi: 10.1016/0167-5273(91)90348-s. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Beaufort-Krol GC, Mulder H, Nagelkerke D, Waterbolk TW, Bink-Boelkens MT. Comparison of longevity, pacing, and sensing characteristics of steroid-eluting epicardial versus conventional endocardial pacing leads in children. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1999 Mar;117(3):523–8. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5223(99)70332-6. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Silvetti MS, Drago F, Grutter G, De Santis A, Di Ciommo V, Ravà L. Twenty years of paediatric cardiac pacing: 515 pacemakers and 480 leads implanted in 292 patients. Europace. 2006 Jul;8(7):530–6. doi: 10.1093/europace/eul062. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources