Pacemakers and Other Cardiac Implantable Devices in Children: Learning From Practice Variation Including Outliers in the Electronic Age

Original Article--Outcomes of Pacing in Egyptian Pediatric Population

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.