pacemaker placement

I'm rail thin too

by skhaneshan - 2017-10-14 16:03:52

My doctor didn't even give me the option of putting it under my skin he immediately said under my muscle because I'm a toothpick. After the swelling went down you can still see it portude slight but it would've been unsighlty under the skin. I feel it is much safer under the muscle as it's more protected and a better pocket forms under the muscle. It's also better if you're really active to have it under the muscle. It adds about 2 weeks of recovery time but it's not painful at all just uncomfortable sometimes. I'm still trying to figure out how to sleep on my left side without squishing it.

mine is buried

by Tracey_E - 2017-10-15 16:16:34

I was very underweight when I got my first one at age 27 and they put it under the breast. It's now under the pectoral. I prefer either of those to just under the skin because I'm very active and it's out of my way. 

mine is buried too

by 0o0 DC 0o0 - 2017-10-16 09:22:46

I went through the same dilemma very recently after suddenly hearing that I needed a PM. I am male, relatively thin, 31 years old and very active and so after lots of thinking and reading many of the opinions on here I asked my EP if I could have mine placed sub-muscular (under the pectoral muscle). He was happy to do so once I had explained my reasoning and after he had explained some of the increased risks associated with doing so. As far as I could gather he considered the immediate risks (infection for example) the same for either placement but there was a slightly higher risk of bleeding with the sub-muscular placement (but only slight). Sub-muscular is obviously a more invasive procedure and so I was fairly sore for the first couple of weeks but being 3 weeks post-op now I can vouch that the recovery is fine and other than a very very slight bulge in the overlying skin (and the scar!) you would never know that incredible little blighter was in there :). It also makes future replacement/battery changes more involved but I am very happy with my decision of having it under the muscle.

Thank you!

by super - 2017-10-16 21:06:38

Thank you all for your comments it has helped me in my decision making significantly! I am leaning more towards under the muscle.

Pacemaker placement

by super - 2017-10-16 21:12:09

What are the increased risks associated with placement under the muscle as opposed to under the skin?

risk

by Tracey_E - 2017-10-16 21:27:52

There is a slightly higher risk of infection because it is more invasive to bury it, but it's pretty low either way. I'm on my 5th and have never had a post-surgery complication. It will hurt more and take longer to heal than if it's just under the skin, tho people vary widely. For me, I got by mostly with ice and tylenol, a few nights took something stronger to sleep. Others want the good stuff for the first few days at least. I've been told I have a high tolerance for pain and I hate the way I feel on pain meds, not to mention the list of meds I'm allergic to is scary and a post-op allergic reaction to something new is Not Fun, so I'm likely to grab and ice pack and suck it up.

It will take longer to heal. I laid low the first week, was mostly back to my regular schedule but napping and moving slowly for another week or two. It took about 3 months until I was back to my old routine at the gym, bending and stretching in any direction without feeling it. Not that it hurt that long, that's how long it took to stop feeling the occasional twinges and noticing it is there.

Once we heal, if we are very active I would say the risks are lower because we aren't going to knock it around. Again, tho, the risk of that is very low too, they are titanium so usually if we give it a good knock the only thing bruised is us. The biggest difference for me is I can hike with a heavy pack, I do Crossfit with very few modifications and don't hold back on weight, I kayak every chance I get and paddle for a few hours straight. It's never in my way. 

Tracey E

by Maverick - 2017-10-22 05:35:33

Your posts are amazing!

Pacemaker placement

by Maverick - 2017-10-22 05:37:48

Is there any downside to having a PM under the skin? It seems simpler to me and less invasive. Not so worried about cosmetic look, just practicality. I am male. Thanks!

Surgery

by Alexa Hesseldenz - 2017-10-23 14:25:18

Hey! I am 20 and got my pacemker in about 6 days ago, I understand the shock. My doctor gav me the option, the problem about implanting one under the breast is that when it comes times to change the batteries you can easily damage the muscles =, even with a highly trained surgeon (this is from the head of electro-cardiology at vanderbilt) I got mine implanted under the skin and it is doing okay, still trying to adjust!

Pacemaker placement

by super - 2017-10-23 19:55:51

Is there anyone out there who is thin and has a pacemaker under the skin who is very active and lifts weights? I am in the process of deciding if I want mine under the skin or under the muscle. Most comments that I have read about very active people have theirs placed under the muscle for protection and less visible. I'm just really curious and would love to hear from someone very active with it under the skin as opposed to under the muscle.

weights

by Tracey_E - 2017-10-23 22:29:14

I'm on my 5th under muscle and wouldn't want it any other way. I love barbells and would worry about cleaning the bar and holding it in front rack if the pacer was too shallow. I'd worry about going too heavy and losing control of the bar and hitting the pacer. I did worry a bit and hold back on weight the first 6 months after my last replacement but it's fine now. If it's too close to the collarbone, you risk damaging the leads if you put pressure on the collarbone also. YMMV, of course, we are all built differently and there are people who have it shallow and lift without issue. 

I love to hike and none of my packs rub. That's a common problem if it's shallow, finding a pack that the straps don't touch. 

Alexa, I haven't have any trouble with damage and I'm on #5, 3 of which were done by a plastic surgeon. I was more sore after replacements than others, but it wasn't bad. After #4, scar tissue had built up and it was getting achy so the plastic surgeon rebuilt the pocket. It was great after that, didn't even know it was there. The main drawback was when a lead went bad and they had to work to tunnel in a new one, that took some work and once again they brought in the plastic surgeon to do the cosmetic part. My mammogram resembles a bowl of spaghetti :o) 

2nd opinion

by super - 2017-11-18 20:46:29

I was told by my cardiologist that I need a pacemaker because I have bradycardia and sinus node dysfunction and she recommended putting under the muscle because I am very thin. I recently went to Cleveland Clinic for a 2nd opinion. I was rather surprised when he told me that he doesn't like to place PM under the muscle due to risk of complications associated with bleeding and that it is much harder to replace down the road. I am very actve and was leaning towards putting under the muscle and now I'm frightened. I am so conflicted. Has anyone had such problems?