Postoperative follow-up of patients with pacemakers in the state of Veracruz

Main Article Content

Claudia Lizbeth García Cortés
Dora María Estrada Durán
Bertha Yolanda Guzmán Rivas

Abstract

Introduction. Currently, one of the main causes of morbidity or mortality in Mexico is cardiovascular disease. Nowadays, advances in technology have allowed pacemakers to improve survival, symptom control, and patient quality, but the follow-up phase after the implantation procedure remains critical.


Objective: To describe the postoperative follow-up of patients with pacemaker use in the state of Veracruz, in order to detect any problem in the postoperative period


Material and methods. A retrospective observational, descriptive, cross-sectional study was conducted. Demographic variables, comorbidities, implant indication, device type and mode, as well as follow-up data at 4–6 weeks, 3–6 months, and annual review were collected. A descriptive analysis of the variables was performed


Results: A total of 143 patients over 18 years of age who underwent pacemaker implantation were included, of which 43 corresponded to the General Hospital of Zone No. 8 IMSS Córdoba and 100 to the Regional General Hospital of Orizaba. The mean age was 74.51 ± 11.18 years in Córdoba and 75.16 ± 12.01 years in Orizaba, with a predominance of females and a predominance of systemic arterial hypertension. The most frequent indication was complete atrioventricular block. Most patients had no immediate adverse events. At follow-up, 100% of the patients attended at 4–6 weeks in Córdoba and 97% in Orizaba. At 3–6 months, adherence was 100% in Córdoba and 94% in Orizaba. In the annual review, attendance decreased to 67.44% in Córdoba and 85% in Orizaba.


Conclusion.  Postoperative follow-up showed high initial adherence and low frequency of complications recorded.

Article Details

How to Cite
García Cortés, Claudia Lizbeth, Dora María Estrada Durán, and Bertha Yolanda Guzmán Rivas. 2026. “Postoperative Follow-up of Patients With Pacemakers in the State of Veracruz”. International Journal of Medical Science and Clinical Research Studies 6 (03):589-94. https://doi.org/10.47191/ijmscrs/v6-i3-26.
Section
Articles

References

I. American Heart Association. American Heart Association [Internet]. 2024 [cited 2025 Sep 16]. Pacemaker. Available from: https://www.heart.org/en/health-topics/arrhythmia/prevention--treatment-of-arrhythmia/pacemaker

II. León-Romero LF, Fernández-Domènech JA, Cueva-Parra Á, Yáñez-Guerrero P, Ruiz-González G, Gómez-Flores JR, et al. Guía para identificar características específicas en dispositivos de estimulación cardiaca mediante figura radiológica. Arch Cardiol Mex. 2023 Apr 1;93(2):223–32. doi:10.24875/ACM.21000395 PubMed PMID: 37037220.

III. Stanford Health Care. Stanford Medicine Health Care [Internet]. 2025 [cited 2025 Aug 20]. Types of Pacemakers. Available from: https://stanfordhealthcare.org/medical-treatments/p/pacemaker/types.html

IV. Bodin A, Texier I, Bisson A, Pierre B, Herbert J, Jacobs M, et al. Dual-chamber vs. single-chamber pacemaker in patients in sinus rhythm with an atrioventricular block: a nationwide cohort study. European Society of Cardiology. 2024 Sep 14;26(1). doi:10.1093/EUROPACE/EUAE238 PubMed PMID: 39271128.

V. Noor TA, Rana MOR, Kumari S, Umer B, Malik J, Ashraf A, et al. Outcomes of primary leadless pacemaker implantation: A systematic review. Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol. 2023 Nov 1;28(6). doi:10.1111/ANEC.13084 PubMed PMID: 37606307.

VI. Glikson M, Cosedis-Nielsen J, Brix-Kronborg M, Michowitz Y, Auricchio A, Moshe-Barbash I, et al. Guía ESC 2021 sobre estimulación cardiaca y terapia de resincronización. Rev Esp Cardiol. 2022 May 1;75(5):430.e1-430.e86. doi:10.1016/J.RECESP.2021.10.025

VII. Camacho MB, Kocheril AG. Leadless Pacemaker Implantation in a Patient With Diminutive Subclavian Veins. J Invasive Cardiol. 2022 Feb 1;34(2):E114–6. doi:10.25270/JIC/21.00118 PubMed PMID: 34995209.

VIII. Usó-Barberà L. CUIDADOS POSTIMPLANTE DE MARCAPASOS Y REHABILITACIÓN CARDÍACA [Internet]. Universitad Jaume I; 2021 [cited 2025 Sep 17]. Available from: https://repositori.uji.es/server/api/core/bitstreams/b2bd3d68-4b18-45e7-9426-e05f7b3f066c/content

IX. Wileczek A, Stodolkiewicz-Nowarska E, Reichert A, Kustron A, Sledz J, Biernikiewicz W, et al. Reevaluation of indications for permanent pacemaker implantation after cardioneuroablation. Polish Heart Journal (Kardiologia Polska). 2023;81(12):1272–5. doi:10.33963/V.KP.97828 PubMed PMID: 37997826.

X. Puette JA, Malek R, Ahmed I, Ellison MB. Manual of Pediatric Cardiac Care: Volume 1, Second Edition [Internet]. StatPearls Publishing; 2024 [cited 2025 Aug 20]. p. 425–38. Pacemaker Insertion. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK526001/ doi:10.1007/978-981-19-8357-3_50 PubMed PMID: 30252257.

XI. Dalia T, Amr BS. StatPearls [Internet]. StatPearls Publishing; 2023 [cited 2025 Aug 20]. Pacemaker Indications. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK507823/ PubMed PMID: 29939600.

XII. Oterino-Manzanas A. Resultados de un servicio 24/7 de implante emergente de marcapasos permanentes [Internet]. Universidad de Salamanca; 2025 [cited 2025 Sep 16]. Available from: https://gredos.usal.es/handle/10366/164177 doi:10.14201/GREDOS.164177

XIII. Inzunza-Cervantes G, Díaz-Dávalos J de J, Flores-Anguiano A, Ornelas-Aguirre JM, Peralta-Figueroa IC, Zazueta-Armenta V. Seguimiento del paciente con marcapasos: interrogatorio y programación básica. Rev Med Inst Mex Seguro Soc. 2023 Nov 6;61(6):809–18. doi:10.5281/ZENODO.10064399 PubMed PMID: 37995347.

XIV. Markos S, Nasir M, Ahmed M, Abebe S, Amogne M, Tesfaye D, et al. Assessment of Trend, Indication, Complications, and Outcomes of Pacemaker Implantation in Adult Patients at Tertiary Hospital of Ethiopia: Retrospective Follow Up Study. Int J Gen Med. 2024 Jan 11;17:93–103. doi:10.2147/IJGM.S448135

XV. Finke J, Pasierski M, Dąbrowski EJ, Kurasz A, Brączkowski J, Drzażdżynska A, et al. Permanent pacemaker implantation following mitral valve surgery. State-of-the-art scoping review. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2025 Jul 1;67(7). doi:10.1093/EJCTS/EZAF210 PubMed PMID: 40569191.

XVI. El-Chami M, Garweg C, Clementy N. American College of Cardiology [Internet]. 2024 [cited 2025 Aug 21]. Leadless Pacemakers at 5-Year Follow-Up. Available from: https://www.acc.org/Latest-in-Cardiology/Journal-Scans/2024/03/11/15/57/leadless-pacemakers-at

XVII. Nieto-Gutiérrez MP, García-García A, Borrego-Iglesias MI, Calero-Vallés Y, Bastos-Amador P, Cózar-León R, et al. Análisis multicéntrico sobre la organización de seguimiento remoto en pacientes portadores de marcapasos. Revista Asociación Española de Enfermería en Cardiología [Internet]. 2021 [cited 2025 Sep 16];28(84):Cardiol. 2021; 28 (84): 5-11. Available from: https://revista.enfermeriaencardiologia.com/index.php/aeec/article/view/51

XVIII. Pérez-Díaz P, Jiménez-Díaz J, Higuera-Sobrino F, Bastante-Díaz MC, Pérez-de-Madrid EC, Fernández-Trujillo Á, et al. Grado de satisfacción e impacto social y medioambiental en pacientes incluidos en un programa de seguimiento remoto de marcapasos. Revista Colombiana de Cardiología. 2022 Jan 1;29(1):23–8. doi:10.24875/RCCAR.M22000113