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.