Browse
Submit Data
Databases
API
Help

Dataset Information

32 Views

0 Connections

0 Citations

0 Reanalyses

0 Downloads

Omics score: 0

Impact of Bundle Branch Block on Permanent Pacemaker Implantation after Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: A Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT: Data regarding the impact of infra-Hisian conduction disturbances leading to permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) remain limited. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of right and/or left bundle branch block (RBBB/LBBB) on post-TAVI PPI. We performed a systematic literature review to identify studies reporting on RBBB and/or LBBB status and post-TAVI PPI. Study design, patient characteristics, and the presence of branch block were analyzed. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CI were extracted. The final analysis included 36 studies, reporting about 55,851 patients. Data on LBBB were extracted from 33 studies. Among 51,026 patients included, 5503 showed pre-implant LBBB (11.9% (10.4%-13.8%)). The influence of LBBB on post-TAVI PPI was not significant OR 1.1474 (0.9025; 1.4588), p = 0.2618. Data on RBBB were extracted from 28 studies. Among 46,663 patients included, 31,603 showed pre-implant RBBB (9.2% (7.3%-11.6%)). The influence of RBBB on post-TAVI PPI was significant OR 4.8581 (4.1571; 5.6775), p < 0.0001. From this meta-analysis, the presence of RBBB increased the risk for post-TAVI PPI, independent of age or LVEF, while this finding was not confirmed for patients experimenting with LBBB. This result emphasizes the need for pre-operative evaluation strategies in patient selection for TAVI.

SUBMITTER: Ravaux JM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8235153 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Json Xml

Similar Datasets

Permanent pacemaker dependency in patients with new left bundle branch block and new first degree atrioventricular block after transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

Project description:Conduction disorders with need for permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation remain frequent complications after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Up to 22% of PPM after TAVI are implanted for new onset left bundle branch block (LBBB) and atrioventricular block (AVB) I. However, clinical benefit and predictors of ventricular pacing in TAVI patients receiving PPM for this indication remain unclear. We retrospectively evaluated pacemaker interrogation data of patients who received a PPM post TAVI for new LBBB and new AVB I. The primary endpoint of this study was relevant ventricular pacing (ventricular pacing rate: Vp ≥ 1%) at the first outpatient pacemaker interrogation. Secondary endpoints were predictors for relevant ventricular pacing. At the first pacemaker interrogation (median follow up at 6.23 [2.8-14.8] months), median ventricular pacing frequency was 1.0% [0.1-17.8]. Out of 61 patients, 36 (59%) had Vp rates ≥ 1%. Patients with frequent ventricular pacing showed longer QRS duration (155 ms ± 17 ms vs. 144 ms ± 18 ms, p = 0.018) at the time of PPM implantation and were less likely treated with a balloon-expandable Edwards Sapiens Valve (39% vs. 12%, p = 0.040). Our findings suggest that the majority of patients with new LBBB and new AVB I after TAVI show relevant ventricular pacing rates at follow up. Further prospective studies are necessary to identify patients at higher risk of pacemaker dependency.

| S-EPMC8692410 | biostudies-literature

Risk Stratification for Pacemaker Implantation after Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Patients with Right Bundle Branch Block.

Project description:BackgroundPermanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) after transcatheter valve implantation (TAVI) is a common complication. Pre-existing right bundle branch block (RBBB) is a strong risk factor for PPI after TAVI. However, a patient-specific approach for risk stratification in this subgroup has not yet been established.MethodsWe investigated TAVI patients with pre-existing RBBB to stratify risk factors for PPI and 1-year-mortality by detailed analysis of ECG data, RBBB morphology and degree of calcification in the implantation area assessed by computed tomography angiography.ResultsBetween 2010 and 2018, 2129 patients underwent TAVI at our institution. Among these, 98 pacemaker-naïve patients with pre-existing RBBB underwent a TAVI procedure. PPI, because of relevant conduction disturbances (CD), was necessary in 43 (43.9%) patients. PPI was more frequently indicated in women vs. men (62.1% vs. 32.8%, p = 0.004) and in men treated with a self-expandable vs. a balloon-expandable valve (58.3% vs. 26.5%, p = 0.035). ECG data (heart rhythm, PQ, QRS, QT) and RBBB morphology had no influence on PPI rate, whereas risk for PPI increased with the degree of calcification in the left septal His-/left bundle branch-area to a 9.375-fold odds for the 3rd tertile of calcification (1.639-53.621; p = 0.012). Overall, 1-year-mortality was comparable among patients with or without PPI (14.0% vs. 16.4%; p = 0.697).ConclusionsPatients with RBBB undergoing TAVI have a high risk of PPI. Among this subgroup, female patients, male patients treated with self-expandable valve types, patients with high load/degree of non-coronary LVOT calcification and patients with atrial fibrillation need enhanced surveillance for CD after procedure.

| S-EPMC9571112 | biostudies-literature

Transcatheter Heart Valve Selection and Permanent Pacemaker Implantation in Patients With Pre-Existent Right Bundle Branch Block.

Project description:Right bundle branch block is an established predictor for new conduction disturbances and need for a permanent pacemaker (PPM) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. The aim of the study was to evaluate the absolute rates of transcatheter aortic valve replacement related PPM implantations in patients with pre-existent right bundle branch block and categorize for different transcatheter heart valves. We pooled data on 306 transcatheter aortic valve replacement patients from 4 high-volume centers in Europe and selected those with right bundle branch block at baseline without a previously implanted PPM. Logistic regression was used to evaluate whether PPM rate differed among transcatheter heart valves after adjustment for confounders. Mean age was 83±7 years and 63% were male. Median Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was 6.3 (interquartile range, 4.1-10.2). The following transcatheter valve designs were used: Medtronic CoreValve (n=130; Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN); Edwards Sapien XT (ES-XT; n=124) and Edwards Sapien 3 (ES-3; n=32; Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA); and Boston Scientific Lotus (n=20; Boston Scientific Corporation, Marlborough, MA). Overall permanent pacemaker implantation rate post-transcatheter aortic valve replacement was 41%, and per valve design: 75% with Lotus, 46% with CoreValve, 32% with ES-XT, and 34% with ES-3. The indication for PPM implantation was total atrioventricular block in 98% of the cases. Lotus was associated with a higher PPM rate than all other valves. PPM rate did not differ between ES-XT and ES-3. Ventricular paced rhythm at 30-day and 1-year follow-up was present in 81% at 89%, respectively. Right bundle branch block at baseline is associated with a high incidence of PPM implantation for all transcatheter heart valves. PPM rate was highest for Lotus and lowest for ES-XT and ES-3. Pacemaker dependency remained high during follow-up.

| S-EPMC5524025 | biostudies-literature

Electrophysiology Testing to Stratify Patients With Left Bundle Branch Block After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.

Project description:Background Left bundle branch block (LBBB) is common after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and is an indicator of subsequent high-grade atrioventricular block (HAVB). No standardized protocol is available to identify LBBB patients at risk for HAVB. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of an electrophysiology study tailored strategy in patients with LBBB after TAVI. Methods and Results We prospectively analyzed consecutive patients with LBBB after TAVI. An electrophysiology study was performed to measure the HV-interval the day following TAVI. In patients with normal His-ventricular (HV)-interval ≤55 ms, a loop recorder was implanted (ILR-group), whereas pacemaker implantation was performed in patients with prolonged HV-interval >55 ms (PM-group). The primary end point was occurrence of HAVB during a follow-up of 12 months. Secondary end points were symptoms, hospitalizations, adverse events because of device implantation or electrophysiology study, and death. Of 373 patients screened after TAVI, 56 patients (82±6 years, 41% male) with LBBB were included. HAVB occurred in 4 of 41 patients (10%) in the ILR-group and in 8 of 15 patients (53%) in the PM-group (P<0.001). We did not identify other predictors for HAVB than the HV interval. The negative predictive value for the cut-off of HV 55 ms to detect HAVB was 90%. No HAVB-related syncope occurred in the 2 groups. Conclusions An electrophysiology study tailored strategy to LBBB after TAVI with a cut-off of HV >55 ms is a feasible and safe approach to stratify patients with regard to developing HAVB during a follow-up of 12 months.

| S-EPMC7335581 | biostudies-literature

Influence of permanent pacemaker implantation after transcatheter aortic valve implantation with new-generation devices.

Project description:ObjectivePermanent pacemaker implantation (PPMI) after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is the most common complication after the procedure. PPMI rates remain high with the new-generation TAVI devices despite improved outcomes concerning paravalvular aortic regurgitation and vascular access complications. However, the impact of PPMI on mortality and clinical outcome is still a matter of debate, and data with new-generation devices on this matter are scarce. Therefore, we sought to analyse the influence of PPMI in patients treated with the new-generation devices on one-year outcome.MethodsWe enrolled 612 consecutive patients without prior pacemaker undergoing transfemoral TAVI with the new-generation devices. Patients with or without PPMI were compared with respect to clinical outcome within one year.ResultsPPMI was performed in 168 patients (24.4% of the overall study population). There was no significant difference in one-year outcome concerning all-cause mortality (PPMI vs. no-PPMI: 12.2% vs. 12.5%, p = 0.94), rate of major adverse events including cardiac, cerebral or valve-related events and bleeding complications (22.1% vs. 24.5%, p = 0.55) or need for rehospitalisation due to cardiac symptoms (16.1% vs. 18.1%, p = 0.63). In patients with reduced ejection fraction (<45%) there was also no impact of PPMI on one-year mortality (14.3% vs. 15.7%, p = 0.86). Furthermore, multivariate analysis did not reveal PPMI to be independently associated with one-year mortality (odds ratio 0.94, 95% confidence interval 0.50-1.74, p = 0.83).ConclusionsIn this large all-comers TAVI population with new-generation devices the need for postprocedural PPMI did not show a statistical significant impact on survival or combined endpoint of major adverse events within one year.

| S-EPMC6288034 | biostudies-literature

Incidence of arrhythmias and impact of permanent pacemaker implantation in hospitalizations with transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

Project description:BackgroundThis study sought to analyze in-hospital outcomes associated with preexisting and newly implanted permanent pacemaker (PPM) in patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). PPM implantation following the development of conduction abnormalities is a common adverse event following TAVR. Furthermore, PPM implantation rates are higher in TAVR hospitalizations compared with the surgical alternative, thus we have analyzed the predictors of pacing post-TAVR.HypothesisWe hypothesize that incidence of arrhythmias are high post-TAVR and have worse adverse outcomes after receiving PPM.MethodsThe study population was identified from the National Inpatient Sample database between 2012 and 2014. TAVR population was identified using ICD-9-CM procedure codes 35.05 and 35.06. Hospitalizations were divided into 3 group: (1) with preexisting PPM, (2) with newly implanted PPM, and (3) without any PPM.ResultsOverall, 0.8% of hospitalizations presented with preexisting PPM and 23.7% of hospitalizations received new PPM. The overall incidence of atrial fibrillation was 44.5%, left bundle branch block 8.9%, complete atrioventricular block 9.5%, and right bundle branch block 2.7%. In-hospital mortality was higher in hospitalizations receiving PPM compared with those without (4.9% vs 4.0%; P = 0.05). Length of stay and cost were higher in the group receiving new PPM. Female sex, atrial fibrillation, left bundle branch block, and second-degree and complete atrioventricular block were significant predictors for receiving PPM after TAVR.ConclusionsA risk stratification for hospitalizations with conduction disorders is necessary to avoid longer hospital stays, added costs, and mortality. Further research is warranted to investigate additional predictors for PPM after TAVR.

| S-EPMC6489908 | biostudies-literature

Permanent pacemaker implantation and left bundle branch block with self-expanding valves - a SCOPE 2 subanalysis.

Project description:BackgroundNo detailed data on left bundle branch block (LBBB) and permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) exist from randomised clinical trials comparing the ACURATE neo and CoreValve Evolut devices.AimsOur aim was to assess the incidence and impact of new LBBB and PPI with self-expanding prostheses from a powered randomised comparison.MethodsFrom the SCOPE 2 trial, 648 patients with no previous pacemaker were analysed for PPI at 30 days, and 426 patients without previous LBBB were adopted for analysis of LBBB at 30 days. Results: At 30 days, 16.5% of patients required PPI; rates were higher in CoreValve Evolut compared to ACURATE neo recipients (21.0% vs 12.3%; p=0.004). Previous right bundle branch block (odds ratio [OR] 6.11, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.19-11.73; p<0.001) was associated with an increased risk of PPI at 30 days, whereas the use of the ACURATE neo (OR 0.50, 95% CI: 0.31-0.81; p=0.005) was associated with a decreased risk. One-year mortality was similar in patients with and without new PPI. A total of 9.4% of patients developed persistent LBBB at 30 days, with higher incidences in CoreValve Evolut recipients (13.4% vs 5.5%; p=0.007). New LBBB at 30 days was associated with lower ejection fraction at 1 year (65.7%±11.0 vs 69.1%±7.6; p=0.041).ConclusionsNew LBBB and PPI rates were lower in ACURATE neo compared to CoreValve Evolut recipients. The ACURATE neo valve was associated with a lower risk of PPI at 30 days. No effect on 1-year mortality was determined for PPI at 30 days, while LBBB at 30 days was associated with reduced ejection fraction at 1 year.

| S-EPMC9909458 | biostudies-literature

Predictors of ventricular pacing burden after permanent pacemaker implantation following transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

Project description:BackgroundIn the era of an expanding use of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), conduction disturbances and the requirement for permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation remains a clinical concern.HypothesisUsing a single-center experience, we sought to identify predictors of ventricular pacing burden after TAVR in patients who required PPM implantation.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective study of 359 consecutive patients with symptomatic severe aortic valve stenosis who underwent TAVR at our institution between September 2013 and July 2019. Thirty patients (8.4%) required a PPM within 30 days after TAVR. Pre and post-TAVR electrocardiograms, pre-TAVR echocardiograms and computed tomography (CT), TAVR procedural details and post-TAVR device interrogation records at 1, 3, and 6 months were reviewed.ResultsMean percentage of ventricular pacing (VP%) at 1, 3, and 6 months was 58%, 59%, and 56% respectively. Using univariate logistic regression analysis, patients who had low VP% < 5% at 6 months were more likely to have a prosthesis/echocardiography-derived left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) diameter ratio < 1.3 (OR 7.00, P-value .048), prosthesis/CT-derived aortic annulus diameter ratio < 1.02 (OR 7.11, P-value .047), post-TAVR new-onset LBBB (OR 16.80, P-value .019), time to PPM implantation greater than 2 days post-TAVR (OR 9.38, P-value .026) and pre-TAVR use of a beta blocker (OR 9.40, P-value .026).ConclusionsIn patients who required a PPM implantation post-TAVR, a lower TAVR prosthesis/LVOT or aortic annulus diameter ratio, post-TAVR new-onset LBBB and later time of PPM implantation showed a trend toward predicting a low VP% at 6 months.

| S-EPMC7661645 | biostudies-literature

Right bundle branch block is not associated with worse short- and mid-term outcome after transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

Project description:BackgroundTranscatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is the standard treatment option for patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) at intermediate or high surgical risk. Preexisting right bundle branch block (RBBB) is a strong predictor of new pacemaker implantation (PPM) after TAVI, and previous data indicate a worse short- and long-term outcome of patients. The aim of this study was to investigate whether preexisting RBBB has an effect on the short- and mid-term outcome of patients undergoing TAVI in a German high-volume TAVI center.MethodsFor the present retrospective analysis, a total of 1,891 patients with native severe AS with successful TAVI without preexisting PPM were included. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality after 30 days and 12 months. Baseline RBBB was present in 190 (10.1%) of cases.ResultsPatients with preexisting RBBB had a considerably higher rate of new PPM after TAVI compared with patients without RBBB (87/190 [45.8%] vs. 219/1,701 [12.9%]; p<0.001). RBBB had no impact on all-cause mortality at 30 days (2.1% vs. 2.7%; p = 0.625) and at 12 months (14.4% vs. 13.6%; p = 0.765). Further stratification according to the presence of new PPM showed a difference in mid-term survival rates between the four groups, with the worst outcome for patients without RBBB and new PPM (log rank p = 0.024). However, no difference in mid-term cardiovascular survival was found.ConclusionPreexisting RBBB is a common finding in patients with severe AS undergoing TAVI and is associated with considerably higher PPM rates but not with worse short- and mid-term outcome.

| S-EPMC8208572 | biostudies-literature

Long-term clinical impact of permanent pacemaker implantation in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Project description:AimsThe aims of this study is to assess by an updated meta-analysis the clinical outcomes related to permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) at long-term (≥12 months) follow-up (LTF).Methods and resultsA comprehensive literature research was performed on PubMed and EMBASE. The primary endpoint was all-cause death. Secondary endpoints were rehospitalization for heart failure, stroke, and myocardial infarction. A subgroup analysis was performed according to the Society of Thoracic Surgeon-Predicted Risk of Mortality (STS-PROM) score. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021243301). A total of 51 069 patients undergoing TAVI from 31 observational studies were included. The mean duration of follow-up was 22 months. At LTF, PPI post-TAVI was associated with a higher risk of all-cause death [risk ratio (RR) 1.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.10-1.25; P < 0.001] and rehospitalization for heart failure (RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.13-1.52; P < 0.001). In contrast, the risks of stroke and myocardial infarction were not affected. Among the 20 studies that reported procedural risk, the association between PPI and all-cause death risk at LTF was statistically significant only in studies enrolling patients with high STS-PROM score (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.12-1.40), although there was a similar tendency of the results in those at medium and low risk.ConclusionPatients necessitating PPI after TAVI have a higher long-term risk of all-cause death and rehospitalization for heart failure as compared to those who do not receive PPI.

| S-EPMC9460982 | biostudies-literature

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

OmicsDI is an Elixir interoperability service. Learn more ›

Tweets

OmicsDI Databases

PRIDE
PeptideAtlas
MassIVE
JPOST Repository
Physiome Model Repository

EGA
EVA
ENA
LINCS
PAXDB
Cell Collective

MetaboLights
Metabolomics Workbench
MetabolomeExpress
GNPS
BioModels
FAIRDOMHub

ArrayExpress
dbGaP
ExpressionAtlas
GEO
NODE

Information

Databases
Help
API
Contact us
Code on GitHub
Terms of use
Submit Data