Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE · 2025
Role of Routine Electrophysiological Study Performed During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement to Predict AV Block.
СтатьяОбзорПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Pagnoni Mattia, Meier David, Luca Adrian, Fournier Stephane, Aminfar Farhang, Haddad Christelle, Maurizi Niccolo, Domenichini Giulia, Le Bloa Mathieu, Herrera Siklody Claudia, Teres Cheryl, Cook Stephane, Goy Jean-Jacques, Togni Mario, Roguelov Christan, Girod Grégoire, Rubimbura Vladimir, Dupré Marion, Eeckhout Eric, Pruvot Etienne, Muller Olivier, Pascale Patrizio
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Periprocedural electrophysiological (EP) testing may be useful to predict high degree atrioventricular block (HAVB) risk in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether pre- and immediate post-TAVR ECG and HV interval findings are predictive of HAVB.
METHODS: Consecutive TAVR patients without prior pacemaker (PM) implantation underwent ECG and standardized HV interval measurements pre- and post-TAVR using the quadripolar catheter for rapid pacing. The primary outcome was HAVB >24 h after TAVR or ventricular pacing need RESULTS: Out of 97 included patients, 8 experienced the primary outcome (7 with HAVB and 1 with PM need). On univariate analysis, pre- and post-TAVR PR, post-TAVR HV, and Delta-HV intervals were predictors of the primary outcome. A Delta-HV interval ≥18 ms predicted HAVB with sensitivity = 50% and specificity = 90% (AUC = 0.708, PPV = 31%), while an HV interval ≥60 ms after TAVR had sensitivity = 63% and specificity = 79% (AUC = 0.681, PPV = 21%). None of the patients with a PR interval ≤180 ms post-TAVR experienced the primary outcome. Among patients with new-onset LBBB, an HV interval post-TAVR >65 ms was the only predictor of HAVB (AUC = 0.776, PPV = 33%, and NPV = 97%).
CONCLUSION: The yield of periprocedural EP assessment during TAVR is limited considering that about half of the at-risk patients fail to be identified. However, early periprocedural risk stratification may be more useful in the subset of patients with new-onset LBBB. Among ECG findings, a post-TAVR PR interval ≤180 ms identifies a subgroup at very low risk, independently of QRS interval and morphology.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether pre- and immediate post-TAVR ECG and HV interval findings are predictive of HAVB.
METHODS: Consecutive TAVR patients without prior pacemaker (PM) implantation underwent ECG and standardized HV interval measurements pre- and post-TAVR using the quadripolar catheter for rapid pacing. The primary outcome was HAVB >24 h after TAVR or ventricular pacing need RESULTS: Out of 97 included patients, 8 experienced the primary outcome (7 with HAVB and 1 with PM need). On univariate analysis, pre- and post-TAVR PR, post-TAVR HV, and Delta-HV intervals were predictors of the primary outcome. A Delta-HV interval ≥18 ms predicted HAVB with sensitivity = 50% and specificity = 90% (AUC = 0.708, PPV = 31%), while an HV interval ≥60 ms after TAVR had sensitivity = 63% and specificity = 79% (AUC = 0.681, PPV = 21%). None of the patients with a PR interval ≤180 ms post-TAVR experienced the primary outcome. Among patients with new-onset LBBB, an HV interval post-TAVR >65 ms was the only predictor of HAVB (AUC = 0.776, PPV = 33%, and NPV = 97%).
CONCLUSION: The yield of periprocedural EP assessment during TAVR is limited considering that about half of the at-risk patients fail to be identified. However, early periprocedural risk stratification may be more useful in the subset of patients with new-onset LBBB. Among ECG findings, a post-TAVR PR interval ≤180 ms identifies a subgroup at very low risk, independently of QRS interval and morphology.