What is the reason for the possible risk of requiring pacemaker implantation after the Maze procedure?

Medical Advisory BoardAll articles are reviewed for accuracy by our Medical Advisory Board
Educational purpose only • Exercise caution as content is pending human review
Article Review Status
Submitted
Under Review
Approved

Last updated: October 22, 2025View editorial policy

Personalize

Help us tailor your experience

Which best describes you? Your choice helps us use language that's most understandable for you.

Reasons for Pacemaker Requirement After Maze Procedure

The full Maze procedure may be associated with more bradycardia requiring pacemaker implantation due to potential disruption of the cardiac conduction system, particularly affecting the sinus node function. 1

Mechanisms Leading to Pacemaker Requirement

  • The Maze procedure creates strategic incisions or ablation lines in the atrial tissue that can potentially affect the normal conduction pathways, particularly when the right atrial lesions are involved 2

  • When the blood supply to the sinus node is disrupted during the procedure, sinus node dysfunction may develop, necessitating permanent pacemaker implantation 1

  • The creation of barriers to conduction within both right and left atria limits the myocardium available for electrical impulse propagation, which can lead to bradyarrhythmias 1

  • The full Maze procedure (Cox Maze III or IV) involves more extensive lesions compared to "mini-maze" procedures, increasing the risk of conduction system damage 1

Specific Conduction Abnormalities

  • Sick sinus syndrome is the most common indication for pacemaker implantation after Maze procedure, accounting for approximately 7.5% of cases 3

  • Complete atrioventricular block is less common but still occurs in approximately 1.5% of patients undergoing the Maze procedure 3

  • Junctional rhythm immediately postoperatively may lead to premature pacemaker implantation in some cases 4

Risk Factors for Pacemaker Requirement

  • Longer preoperative atrial fibrillation duration significantly increases the risk of requiring a pacemaker (hazard ratio 1.14) 3

  • Advanced age is an independent risk factor for pacemaker implantation after Maze procedure (hazard ratio 1.05) 3

  • The absence of atrial contraction after the Maze procedure is strongly associated with subsequent pacemaker implantation (hazard ratio 11.92) 5

  • Pre-existing conduction system disease may be unmasked after successful restoration of sinus rhythm following the Maze procedure 4

Incidence and Timing

  • In-hospital pacemaker implantation occurs in approximately 1.6% of patients undergoing the modified Cryo-Maze procedure 3

  • Late-onset pacemaker implantation occurs in approximately 7.3% of patients during long-term follow-up 3

  • The cumulative incidence of pacemaker implantation increases over time: 2.8% at 1 year, 7.7% at 5 years, and 10.8% at 10 years 3

  • Recent improvements in surgical technique have reduced the risk of sinus node dysfunction requiring pacemaker to less than 10% 1

Procedural Considerations

  • The full Maze procedure is more effective for treating atrial fibrillation (75-95% success rate) but carries a higher risk of bradycardia requiring pacemaker compared to less extensive "mini-maze" procedures 1

  • The ACC/AHA/HRS guidelines recommend routine placement of temporary epicardial pacing wires during surgery for atrial fibrillation 1

  • Permanent pacing is recommended before discharge in patients who have new postoperative sinus node dysfunction or atrioventricular block with persistent symptoms or hemodynamic instability that does not resolve after surgery 1

Clinical Implications

  • Despite the risk of requiring a pacemaker, the Maze procedure remains a reasonable option at the time of mitral valve repair or replacement for treatment of chronic, persistent AF (Class IIa recommendation) 1

  • The mortality, incidence of cerebrovascular accidents, and rate of atrial fibrillation recurrence are not significantly different between patients with and without pacemaker implantation after Maze procedure 3

  • When deciding between a full Maze versus a less extensive "mini-maze" procedure, clinicians must weigh the higher efficacy of the full Maze against the increased risk of requiring a pacemaker 1

References

Guideline

Guideline Directed Topic Overview

Dr.Oracle Medical Advisory Board & Editors, 2025

Guideline

Surgical Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation with the Maze Procedure

Praxis Medical Insights: Practical Summaries of Clinical Guidelines, 2025

Research

The Maze Procedure and Postoperative Pacemakers.

The Annals of thoracic surgery, 2018

Professional Medical Disclaimer

This information is intended for healthcare professionals. Any medical decision-making should rely on clinical judgment and independently verified information. The content provided herein does not replace professional discretion and should be considered supplementary to established clinical guidelines. Healthcare providers should verify all information against primary literature and current practice standards before application in patient care. Dr.Oracle assumes no liability for clinical decisions based on this content.

Have a follow-up question?

Our Medical A.I. is used by practicing medical doctors at top research institutions around the world. Ask any follow up question and get world-class guideline-backed answers instantly.