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