Periprocedural predictors of new-onset conduction abnormalities after transcatheter aortic valve replacement

9Citations
Citations of this article
15Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background: New-onset conduction abnormalities (CAs) following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are associated with hospital rehospitalization and long-term mortality, but available predictors are sparse. This study sought to determine clinical predictors of new-onset left bundle branch block (LBBB) and new permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation in patients undergoing TAVR. Methods and Results: We enrolled 290 patients who received SAPIEN 3 (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA, USA; n=217) or Evolut R (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA; n=73) from a prospective registry at Nouvel Hôpital Civil, Strasbourg, France between September 2014 and February 2018. Of 242 patients without pre-existing LBBB, 114 (47%) experienced new-onset LBBB and/or new PPM implantation. A difference between membranous septal length and implantation depth (ΔMSID) was the only predictor of CAs for both types of valves. In the multivariate analysis, PR interval and ?MSID remained as sole predictors of CAs. The risk for adverse clinical events, including all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and heart failure hospitalization, was higher for patients with CAs as compared with patients without CAs (hazard ratio: 2.10; 95% confidence interval: 1.26 to 3.57; P=0.004). Conclusions: Computed tomography assessment of membranous septal anatomy and implantation depth predicted CAs after TAVR with new-generation valves. Future studies are required to identify whether adjustment of the implantation depth can reduce the risk of CAs and adverse clinical outcomes.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Matsushita, K., Kanso, M., Ohana, M., Marchandot, B., Kibler, M., Heger, J., … Ohlmann, P. (2020). Periprocedural predictors of new-onset conduction abnormalities after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Circulation Journal, 84(10), 1875–1883. https://doi.org/10.1253/circj.CJ-20-0257

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free