Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE · 2019
Factors predicting persistence of AV nodal block in post-TAVR patients following permanent pacemaker implantation.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Lader Joshua M, Barbhaiya Chirag R, Subnani Kishore, Park David, Aizer Anthony, Holmes Douglas, Staniloae Cezar, Williams Mathew R, Chinitz Larry A
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: A common complication of transcatheter aortic valve repair (TAVR) is development of conduction defects requiring pacemaker (PPM) implantation. These defects are not universally permanent.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the incidence and predictors of persistent device dependency in patients with PPM implantation following TAVR with a self-expanding prosthesis.
METHODS: Records of patients who underwent post-TAVR PPM implantation were reviewed. Patients with persistent complete AV block (AVBIII) one month post-TAVR were compared to those regaining conduction.
RESULTS: Between September 2014 and March 2017, 485 patients underwent TAVR with a self-expanding prosthesis; 77 (15.9%) underwent PPM implantation for AVBIII. Device interrogation at one month was available for 61 patients (79%): 22 (36.1%) had resolution of AVBIII while 39 (63.9%) remained pacemaker-dependent. Pre-TAVR right bundle branch block was more frequent in device-dependent patients (19 of 38, 50% vs 4 of 22, 18%; RR 2.75; P = .01). Device-dependence was associated with AVBIII as the first postprocedural rhythm (37 of 39, 95% vs 12 of 22, 55%; RR 1.74; P < .0001), earlier implantation (median 1d, IQR: 0-1.5d vs 2d, IQR: 1.0-4.0d, P = .0004), and a shorter duration of hospitalization (median 3d, IQR: 2-3.5d vs 4d, IQR: 2-5.75d, P = .03). Pacemaker dependence was also associated with a higher prosthesis-to left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) diameter (1.45 ± 0.11 vs 1.39 ± 0.07; P = .02) and the lack of prior aortic valvuloplasty (5 of 39, 13% vs 8 of 22, 36%; RR 0.35; P = .03).
CONCLUSIONS: In patients receiving a PPM following self-expanding TAVR, a long-term pacing requirement can be predicted from the timing of AV block, existing conduction-system disease, larger prosthesis-to-LVOT diameter, and the lack of aortic valvuloplasty.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the incidence and predictors of persistent device dependency in patients with PPM implantation following TAVR with a self-expanding prosthesis.
METHODS: Records of patients who underwent post-TAVR PPM implantation were reviewed. Patients with persistent complete AV block (AVBIII) one month post-TAVR were compared to those regaining conduction.
RESULTS: Between September 2014 and March 2017, 485 patients underwent TAVR with a self-expanding prosthesis; 77 (15.9%) underwent PPM implantation for AVBIII. Device interrogation at one month was available for 61 patients (79%): 22 (36.1%) had resolution of AVBIII while 39 (63.9%) remained pacemaker-dependent. Pre-TAVR right bundle branch block was more frequent in device-dependent patients (19 of 38, 50% vs 4 of 22, 18%; RR 2.75; P = .01). Device-dependence was associated with AVBIII as the first postprocedural rhythm (37 of 39, 95% vs 12 of 22, 55%; RR 1.74; P < .0001), earlier implantation (median 1d, IQR: 0-1.5d vs 2d, IQR: 1.0-4.0d, P = .0004), and a shorter duration of hospitalization (median 3d, IQR: 2-3.5d vs 4d, IQR: 2-5.75d, P = .03). Pacemaker dependence was also associated with a higher prosthesis-to left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) diameter (1.45 ± 0.11 vs 1.39 ± 0.07; P = .02) and the lack of prior aortic valvuloplasty (5 of 39, 13% vs 8 of 22, 36%; RR 0.35; P = .03).
CONCLUSIONS: In patients receiving a PPM following self-expanding TAVR, a long-term pacing requirement can be predicted from the timing of AV block, existing conduction-system disease, larger prosthesis-to-LVOT diameter, and the lack of aortic valvuloplasty.