Back to Search Start Over

Permanent Pacemaker Implantation Following Valve-in-Valve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Authors :
Abdelhakim Allali
Nili Schamroth Pravda
Mohamed Abdel-Wahab
Didier Champagnac
Matti Adam
Albert W. Chan
Alessandro Iadanza
John G. Webb
Henrique Barbosa Ribeiro
Claudia Fiorina
David Hildick-Smith
Brian Whisenant
Harindra C. Wijeysundera
Thomas Pilgrim
Lars Søndergaard
Sabine Bleiziffer
Danny Dvir
Gaetan Charbonnier
Giuseppe Bruschi
Cristina Giannini
Marco Barbanti
Anna Sonia Petronio
Björn Redfors
Stéphane Noble
Jasmin Shamekhi
Andrew Chatfield
Alberto Alperi
Jörg Kempfert
Didier Tchetche
Won-Keun Kim
Matheus Simonato
Roberto Nerla
Timm Ubben
Marco Agrifoglio
Matteo Montorfano
Moritz Seiffert
Francesco Saia
Magdalena Erlebach
Hafid Amrane
Luca Testa
Massimo Napodano
Lars Oliver Conzelmann
Josep Rodés-Cabau
Christina Brinkmann
Azeem Latib
Ran Kornowski
Henrik Nissen
Source :
Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 77:2263-2273
Publication Year :
2021
Publisher :
Elsevier BV, 2021.

Abstract

Background Permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) remains one of the main drawbacks of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), but scarce data exist on PPI after valve-in-valve (ViV) TAVR, particularly with the use of newer-generation transcatheter heart valves (THVs). Objectives The goal of this study was to determine the incidence, factors associated with, and clinical impact of PPI in a large series of ViV-TAVR procedures. Methods Data were obtained from the multicenter VIVID Registry and included the main baseline and procedural characteristics, in-hospital and late (median follow-up: 13 months [interquartile range: 3 to 41 months]) outcomes analyzed according to the need of periprocedural PPI. All THVs except CoreValve, Cribier-Edwards, Sapien, and Sapien XT were considered to be new-generation THVs. Results A total of 1,987 patients without prior PPI undergoing ViV-TAVR from 2007 to 2020 were included. Of these, 128 patients (6.4%) had PPI after TAVR, with a significant decrease in the incidence of PPI with the use of new-generation THVs (4.7% vs. 7.4%; p = 0.017), mainly related to a reduced PPI rate with the Evolut R/Pro versus CoreValve (3.7% vs. 9.0%; p = 0.002). There were no significant differences in PPI rates between newer-generation balloon- and self-expanding THVs (6.1% vs. 3.9%; p = 0.18). In the multivariable analysis, older age (odds ratio [OR]: 1.05 for each increase of 1 year; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.02 to 1.07; p = 0.001), larger THV size (OR: 1.10; 95% CI: 1.01 to 1.20; p = 0.02), and previous right bundle branch block (OR: 2.04; 95% CI: 1.00 to 4.17; p = 0.05) were associated with an increased risk of PPI. There were no differences in 30-day mortality between the PPI (4.7%) and no-PPI (2.7%) groups (p = 0.19), but PPI patients exhibited a trend toward higher mortality risk at follow-up (hazard ratio: 1.39; 95% CI: 1.02 to 1.91; p = 0.04; p = 0.08 after adjusting for age differences between groups). Conclusions In a contemporary large series of ViV-TAVR patients, the rate of periprocedural PPI was relatively low, and its incidence decreased with the use of new-generation THV systems. PPI following ViV-TAVR was associated with a trend toward increased mortality at follow-up.

Details

ISSN :
07351097
Volume :
77
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
Journal of the American College of Cardiology
Accession number :
edsair.doi...........cdd4ae01607e7e1b123dcdee21ed105f
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2021.03.228