Conclusion
Temporary cardiac pacing is commonly used in settings of
life-threatening arrhythmia. Patients with BTTP are paced exclusively in
the ICU and are generally non-ambulatory. BTTPs are associated with
major complications including lead dislodgement, thromboembolism, and
access site related adverse events. On the other hand, temporary
permanent pacemakers with active fixation leads provide more stability
leading to lower likelihood of lead dislodgement, and VTE. This allows
early patient mobility. These findings make TPPM superior to BTTP in the
management of critically ill patients, both from the standpoint of
patient outcomes as well as metrics of healthcare utilization.
Additional prospective and randomized controlled trials are required to
validate our findings and assess long term outcomes between the two
modalities.