Study Limitations
This is a retrospective cohort study looking back at patients with a temporary pacemaker between 2014 and 2022. An inherent limitation to retrospective analyses is the reliability on available clinical data and predisposition to uncontrolled selection bias. Secondly, our TPM outcomes examination was performed over a several-year timeframe in which practice patterns may have changed. Our study lacked post-hospitalization outcomes analysis; our results do not reflect long term improved outcomes with TPPM over BTTP. Utilization of fixation leads for temporary pacing is an “off-label use” of this device and not yet FDA approved, thus a large prospective controlled study comparing both techniques is necessary to assess short- and long-term outcomes between the two different temporary pacing modalities. On the other hand, we included the largest number of subjects to date for any study looking at TPM outcomes. Our study includes demographic characteristics that are usually under-represented in other studies, including female gender, and non-white racial minorities, allowing for greater generalizability of our results