mortenmhp

mortenmhp t1_j1ogoni wrote

Sorry to break it to you. If you are getting log in attempts on Steam with 2fa, someone has your password. Either you got phished, your password was reused and leaked from somewhere or you have a keylogger.

8

mortenmhp t1_iy9pvt0 wrote

> Rolls-Royce, a business established in 1904 which today designs, manufactures and distributes power systems for aviation and other industries. Rolls-Royce is the world's second-largest maker of aircraft engines

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolls-Royce_Holdings

While you might know them for luxury cars, they are really much bigger and well known in aviation.

2

mortenmhp t1_ir240tv wrote

Definitely. At least for the Micra, which is the only cordless in general use here we mostly use it for the most frail patients where we worry if the surgery of a regular pacemaker will be an issue or that the skin will heal properly if they have barely any body fat. If not for the price it'd probably be more popular, but even then we wouldn't recommend it if there were a chance of the patient outliving the battery.

The article says he implanted it in a 64 year old woman, which imo is way too young unless they plan to be able to remove it(doesn't look like it)

I'm curious how this is supposed to be a dual chamber pm though? Being cordless would almost by definition mean only having direct contact with the right ventricle. I'm wondering if it is just like the Micra av that tries to sense the atrial contraction to synchronize. That's not really dual chamber though. The article doesn't specify and I'm not very familiar with Abbott's cordless models.

Edit: looking up the aveir, it looks like they actually use 2 individual devices, one for right atrium and one for right ventricle, which communicates wirelessly. Neat. Also they wrote that it's designed to be extractable, which is nice i guess, but it is never unproblematic to remove something screwed into the heart. There is a reason leads are not rarely left even if they could be extracted.

6

mortenmhp t1_ir1z4pv wrote

If you are less than 60-70 years old at that point, I'd definitely go for regular pacemaker. If you get one of these, even if they last 10 they don't really pull them out again so instead of having one on your chest replaced, now you get to have 2 inside your heart. Additionally if you already have a pacemaker it makes little sense to just leave it and put a cordless in at the same time. It makes even less sense to open to the pacemaker to remove it for one of these when you could just replace the old one.

2