Permanent pacemaker implantation late after transcatheter aortic valve implantation

1. Download : Download high-res image (163KB)
2. Download : Download full-size image

     

Pacemaker dependency after transcatheter aortic valve replacement compared to surgical aortic valve replacement

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a standard treatment indicated for severe aortic stenosis in high-risk patients. The objective of this study was to evaluate the incidence of pacemaker dependency after permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) following TAVR or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) and the risk of mortality at a tertiary center in Korea.In this retrospective study conducted at a single tertiary center, clinical outcomes related to pacemaker dependency were evaluated for patients implanted with pacemakers after TAVR from January 2012 to November 2018 and post-SAVR from January 2005 to May 2015. Investigators reviewed patients’ electrocardiograms and baseline rhythms as well as conduction abnormalities. Pacemaker dependency was defined as a ventricular pacing rate > 90% with an intrinsic rate of <40 bpm during interrogation.Of 511 patients who underwent TAVR for severe AS, 37(7.3%) underwent PPI after a median duration of 6 (3–7) days, whereas pacemakers were implanted after a median interval of 13 (8–28) days post-SAVR in 10 of 663 patients (P < .001). Pacemaker dependency was observed in 36 (97.3%) patients during 7 days immediately post-TAVR and in 25 (64.9%) patients between 8 and 180 days post-TAVR. Pacemaker dependency occurred after 180 days in 17 (50%) patients with TAVR and in 4 (44.4%) patients with SAVR. Twelve (41.4%) patients were pacemaker-dependent after 365 days post-TAVR.Pacemaker dependency did not differ at 6 months after TAVR vs SAVR. In patients undergoing post-TAVR PPI, 58.6% were not pacemaker-dependent at 1 year after the TAVR procedure.     

Comparison of complications and outcomes to one year of transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with severe aortic stenosis

Comparisons of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with severe aortic stenosis remain sparse or limited by a short follow-up. We sought to evaluate early and midterm outcomes of consecutive patients (n = 618) undergoing successful TAVI (n = 218) or isolated SAVR (n = 400) at 2 centers. The primary end point was incidence of Valvular Academic Research Consortium-defined major adverse cerebrovascular and cardiac events (MACCEs) up to 1 year. Control of potential confounders was attempted with extensive statistical adjustment by covariates and/or propensity score. In-hospital MACCEs occurred in 73 patients (11.8%) and was more frequent in patients treated with SAVR compared to those treated with TAVI (7.8% vs 14.0%, p = 0.022). After addressing potential confounders using 3 methods of statistical adjustment, SAVR was consistently associated with a higher risk of MACCEs than TAVI, with estimates of relative risk ranging from 2.2 to 2.6 at 30 days, 2.3 to 2.5 at 6 months, and 2.0 to 2.2 at 12 months. This difference was driven by an adjusted increased risk of life-threatening bleeding at 6 and 12 months and stroke at 12 months with SAVR. Conversely, no differences in adjusted risk of death, stroke and myocardial infarction were noted between TAVI and SAVR at each time point. In conclusion, in a large observational registry with admitted potential for selection bias and residual confounding, TAVI was not associated with a higher risk of 1-year MACCEs compared to SAVR.     

Computed tomography derived predictors of permanent pacemaker implantation after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: A meta-analysis

Severe symptomatic tricuspid regurgitation (TR) remains an undertreated disease. Multiple trans-catheter treatment options are currently under investigation. Transcatheter caval valve implantation (CAVI) has been utilized as a treatment option and aims at decreasing or eliminating the caval backflow that occurs in severe TR patients. Understanding challenges with this therapy is paramount. Hereby we present a CAVI case with resultant non-coaptation of valve leaflets in a patient with a prominent Eustachian ridge.     

Immediate outcome after sutureless versus transcatheter aortic valve replacement

The aim of this study was to compare the immediate outcome of patients undergoing transcatheter (TAVI) versus surgical aortic valve replacement with the sutureless Perceval bioprosthesis (SU-AVR). This is a retrospective multicenter analysis of 773 patients who underwent either TAVI (394 patients, mean age, 80.8 ± 5.5 years, mean EuroSCORE II 5.6 ± 4.9 %) or SU-AVR (379 patients, 77.4 ± 5.4 years, mean EuroSCORE II 4.0 ± 3.9 %) with or without concomitant myocardial revascularization. Data on SU-AVRs were provided by six European institutions (Belgium, Finland, Germany, Italy and Sweden) and data on TAVIs were provided by a single institution (Catania, Italy). In-hospital mortality was 2.6 % after SU-AVR and 5.3 % after TAVI (p = 0.057). TAVI was associated with a significantly high rate of mild (44.0 vs. 2.1 %) and moderate–severe paravalvular regurgitation (14.1 vs. 0.3 %, p < 0.0001) as well as the need for permanent pacemaker implantation (17.3 vs. 9.8 %, p = 0.003) compared with SU-AVR. The analysis of patients within the 25th and 75th percentiles interval of EuroSCORE II, i.e., 2.1–5.8 %, confirmed the findings of the overall series. One-to-one propensity score-matched analysis resulted in 144 pairs with similar baseline characteristics and operative risk. Among these matched pairs, in-hospital mortality (6.9 vs. 1.4 %, p = 0.035) was significantly higher after TAVI. SU-AVR with the Perceval prosthesis in intermediate-risk patients is associated with excellent immediate survival and is a valid alternative to TAVI in these patients.     

Transaortic transcatheter aortic valve implantation within a previous bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement

This report documents the first reported case of transaortic transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) using the CoreValve ReValving system (Medtronic CoreValve System, Luxembourg), within a previous bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement. TAVI has become a recognized percutaneous treatment for patients with severe native or bioprosthetic aortic valve stenosis. However, as the number of patients screened for TAVI increases, a number of patients are found with absolutely no option for peripheral arterial access, either from the femoral or subclavian routes. Transaortic CoreValve placement offers an alternate minimally invasive hybrid surgical/interventional technique when peripheral access is not possible. A CoreValve prosthesis was implanted via the transaortic route in an 81‐year‐old woman with severe bioprosthetic aortic valve stenosis (21 mm Mitroflow pericardial valve, peak instantaneous gradient of 99 mmHg, effective valve orifice area (EOA) of 0.3 cm², as ilio‐femoral and left subclavian angiography revealed small calibre vessels (<6 mm). Access was achieved via a mini thoracotomy via the left anterior second intercostal space. The procedure went without complication. Post procedure the patient was transferred directly to the Cardiac Care Unit for recuperation. Post procedure echocardiography showed that the TAVI was well positioned with no para‐valvular leak and a reduction in peak instantaneous gradient to 30 mmHg and an increase in EOA to 1.5 cm². She was discharged on the third post‐procedural day in sinus rhythm with a narrow QRS complex. CoreValve implantation within previous surgical bioprosthesis is now an established treatment. The transaortic approach to transcatheter implantation is a promising recent development, when due to anatomical reasons, transfemoral or subclavian TAVI is not feasible. © 2011 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.