[Comparison of leadless pacemaker and conventional pacemaker for quality of life improvement in patients with bradyarrhythmias].

Objective: To compare the improvement in quality of life (QoL) after implantation of leadless pacemakers (L-PM) with that of conventional pacemakers (C-PM) in patients with slow-onset arrhythmias. Methods: A total of 112 patients who received pacemaker implantation for the first time at Beijing Anzhen Hospital from January 2020 to July 2021 were selected, including 50 leadless pacemakers (L-PM) and 62 conventional pacemakers (C-PM). Clinical baseline data were collected, pacemaker-related complications and SF-36 scores were recorded and followed up at 1, 3, and 12 months post-operatively; SF-36 questionnaires and additional questionnaires were completed to compare the quality of life of the 2 groups; and factors associated with the change in QoL from baseline to 1, 3 and 12 months post-operatively were analyzed using multiple linear regression models. Results: The age of the 112 patients was (70.3±10.5) years, and 69 patients (61.6%) were male. The age of patients with L-PM and C-PM was (75.8±8.5) years and (67.5±10.4) years, respectively (P=0.004). In the L-PM group, 50 patients completed 1-, 3-, and 12-month follow-up. In the C-PM group, 62 patients completed the 1-month and 3-month follow-up, and 60 completed the 12-month follow-up. The C-PM group had a higher incidence of discomfort in the surgical area, impact of daily activities for the discomfort in the surgical area, and concern about heart or overall condition than the L-PM group on the additional questionnaire (all P values<0.05). After adjusting for age and SF-36 scores at baseline, at 12th month of follow-up, patients implanted with C-PM had lower values for quality of life PF, RP, SF, RE, and MH scores compared to patients implanted with L-PM, with beta values (95%CI) of -24.500 (-30.010--18.981), -27.118 (-32.997--21.239), -8.085 (-12.536--3.633), -4.839 (-9.437--0.241), -12.430 (-18.558--6.301), respectively (all P values<0.05). Conclusions: L-PM is associated with better QoL in slow arrhythmias patients, and patients who received L-PM reported less activity limitations due to surgical discomfort and less emotional distress.目的： 比较无导线起搏器（L-PM）与传统起搏器（C-PM）植入术对缓慢型心律失常患者的生活质量（QoL）改善情况。 方法： 回顾性纳入2020年1月至 2021年7月在北京安贞医院首次植入起搏器的112例患者，其中植入L-PM者50例，植入C-PM者62例，手术成功率100%。收集临床基线资料，记录与起搏器相关的并发症及入院36条简明健康状况调查表（SF-36）评分，并于术后1、3、12个月进行随访，填写SF-36问卷和附加问卷，比较2组患者的生活质量情况，采用多元线性回归模型分析QoL从基线开始到术后1、3、12个月变化的相关因素。 结果： 112例患者的年龄为（70.3±10.5）岁，其中男69例（61.6%）。L-PM组和C-PM组患者年龄分别为（75.8±8.5）和（67.5±10.4）岁（P=0.004）。L-PM组50例患者均完成了术后1、3、12个月随访，C-PM组62例患者完成术后1、3个月随访，60例完成12个月随访。附加问卷中C-PM组患者手术区域感到不适，因手术区域不适而影响日常活动、对自己心脏或整体状况感到担忧的发生率均较L-PM组患者高（均P<0.05）。调整年龄和基线SF-36分数后，随访12个月时，与L-PM组相比，C-PM组生活质量生理机能（PF）、生理职能（RP）、社会功能（SF）、情感职能（RE）、精神健康（MH）评分数值较低，β值（95%CI）分别为-24.500（-30.010~-18.981）、-27.118（-32.997~-21.239）、-8.085（-12.536~-3.633）、-4.839（-9.437~-0.241）、-12.430（-18.558~-6.301）；均P<0.05。 结论： 缓慢型心律失常患者植入L-PM后能更好地提高QoL，接受L-PM的患者因手术不适造成的活动受限和不良情绪较少。.