Quality of life outcomes in transcatheter aortic valve replacement patients requiring pacemaker implantation

Chronic Right Ventricular Pacing Post-Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Attenuates the Benefit on Left Ventricular Function

Background: Conduction abnormality post-transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) remains clinically significant and usually requires chronic pacing. The effect of right ventricular (RV) pacing post-TAVI on clinical outcomes warrants further studies. Methods: We identified 147 consecutive patients who required chronic RV pacing after a successful TAVI procedure and propensity-matched these patients according to the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) risk score to a control group of patients that did not require RV pacing post-TAVI. We evaluated routine echocardiographic measurements and performed offline speckle-tracking strain analysis for the purpose of this study on transthoracic echocardiographic (TTE) images performed at 9 to 18 months post-TAVI. Results: The final study population comprised 294 patients (pacing group n = 147 and non-pacing group n = 147), with a mean age of 81 ± 7 years, 59% male; median follow-up was 354 days. There were more baseline conduction abnormalities in the pacing group compared to the non-pacing group (56.5% vs. 41.5%. p = 0.01). Eighty-eight patients (61.6%) in the pacing group required RV pacing due to atrioventricular (AV) conduction block post-TAVI. The mean RV pacing burden was 44% in the pacing group. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was similar at follow-up in the pacing vs. non-pacing groups (57 ± 13.0%, 59 ± 11% p = 0.31); however, LV global longitudinal strain (-12.7 ± 3.5% vs. -18.8 ± 2.7%, p < 0.0001), LV apical strain (-12.9 ± 5.5% vs. 23.2 ± 9.2%, p < 0.0001), and mid-LV strain (-12.7 ± 4.6% vs. -18.7 ± 3.4%, p < 0.0001) were significantly worse in the pacing vs. non-pacing groups. Conclusions: Chronic RV pacing after the TAVI procedure is associated with subclinical LV systolic dysfunction within 1.5 years of follow-up.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation and Conduction Disturbances: Focus on Clinical Implications

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is an established alternative to surgery in patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis and has expanded its indications to even low-surgical-risk patients. Conduction abnormalities (CA) and permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantations remain a relatively common finding post TAVI due to the close proximity of the conduction system to the aortic root. New onset left bundle branch block (LBBB) and high-grade atrioventricular block are the most commonly reported CA post TAVI. The overall rate of PPM implantation post TAVI varies and is related to pre- and intra-procedural factors. Therefore, when screening patients for TAVI, Heart Teams should take under consideration the various anatomical, pathophysiological and procedural conditions that predispose to CA and PPM requirement after the procedure. This is particularly important as TAVI is being offered to younger patients with longer life-expectancy. Herein, we highlight the incidence, predictors, impact and management of CA in patients undergoing TAVI.

Sex differences in permanent pacemaker implantation after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There is limited evidence on the effect of sex on permanent pacemaker implantation (PPMI) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). The primary objective of this meta-analysis was to determine the role of sex among patients requiring PPMI post-TAVR.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted using the SCOPUS, MEDLINE, and CINAHL databases for studies published until October 2022. Eligible studies included published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and Observational Cohort Studies (OCS) articles that reported PPMI as an outcome of pacemaker status following TAVR. This study was performed per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Guidelines. Publication bias was estimated using a Funnel plot and Egger's test. Data were pooled using a random-effects model. The primary endpoint was the sex difference in PPMI after TAVR, with odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) extracted.

RESULTS

Data was obtained from 63 studies, and a total of 79,655 patients were included. The cumulative PPMI rate was 15.5% (95% CI, 13.6%-17.7%). The pooled analysis revealed that while there were more females than males undergoing TAVR (51.6%, 95% CI 50.4%-52.8%), males have a 14.5% higher risk for post-TAVR PPMI than females (OR 1.145, 95% CI 1.047-1.253, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Males are more likely to experience PPMI after TAVR than females. Further research needs to be done to better explain these observed differences in outcomes.

Site-Level Variation and Predictors of Permanent Pacemaker Implantation Following TAVR in the Evolut Low-Risk Trial

We evaluated predictors of permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) following self-expanding transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), examined site-to-site variability of PPI rates, and explored the relationship of implantation methods on the need for PPI. Despite the benefits of TAVR compared to surgical aortic valve replacement, increased PPI remains a limitation. A total of 699 patients without baseline PPI were included in the study. Clinical, echocardiographic, and procedural characteristics were compared in patient with and without new PPI. Clinical outcomes were assessed at 30 days and 1 year. Funnel plots were constructed to display site-to- site variability and identify outliers in PPI. Clinical outcomes were similar in patients with and without PPI. Predictors of a new PPI within 7 days included a baseline right bundle branch block (p < 0.001) and not using general anesthesia (p = 0.003). There was substantial site to site variability in the rate of PPI. Patients at sites with a lower PPI rate had shallower implantation depth at the non-coronary (p < 0.001) and the left coronary sinus (p < 0.001), and fewer patients with an implantation depth > 5 mm below the annulus (p = 0.004). In low-risk patients undergoing TAVR with Evolut valves, baseline conduction disorders and implant depth were important predictors of PPI. Implantation method may have contributed to this variability in PPI rates across clinical sites.

Evaluating treatment-specific post-discharge quality-of-life and cost-effectiveness of TAVR and SAVR: Current practice & future directions

•

Post-TAVR HRQOL shows more rapid short-term improvement than SAVR within trials.

•

Higher TAVR use requires better real-world TAVR/SAVR cost-effectiveness comparisons.

•

Wearable devices should be used in real-world settings to compare TAVR/SAVR HRQOL.

Background

Aortic stenosis is a prevalent valvular heart disease that is treated primarily by surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) or transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), which are common treatments for addressing symptoms secondary to valvular heart disease. This narrative review article focuses on the existing literature comparing recovery and cost-effectiveness for SAVR and TAVR.

Methods

Major databases were searched for relevant literature discussing HRQOL and cost-effectiveness of TAVR and SAVR. We also searched for studies analyzing the use of wearable devices to monitor post-discharge recovery patterns.

Results

The literature focusing on quality-of-life following TAVR and SAVR has been limited primarily to single-center observational studies and randomized controlled trials. Studies focused on TAVR report consistent and rapid improvement relative to baseline status. Common HRQOL instruments (SF-36, EQ-5D, KCCQ, MLHFQ) have been used to document that TF-TAVR is advantageous over SAVR at 1-month follow-up, with the benefits leveling off following 1 year. TF-TAVR is economically favorable relative to SAVR, with estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio values ranging from $50,000 to $63,000/QALY gained. TA-TAVR has not been reported to be advantageous from an HRQOL or cost-effectiveness perspective.

Conclusions

While real-world experiences are less described, large-scale trials have advanced our understanding of recovery and cost-effectiveness of aortic valve replacement treatment strategies. Future work should focus on scalable wearable device technology, such as smartwatches and heart-rate monitors, to facilitate real-world evaluation of TAVR and SAVR to support clinical decision-making and outcomes ascertainment.

Predictors of Permanent Pacemaker Implantation in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement - A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

As transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) technology expands to healthy and lower‐risk populations, the burden and predictors of procedure‐related complications including the need for permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation needs to be identified.

Methods and Results

Digital databases were systematically searched to identify studies reporting the incidence of PPM implantation after TAVR. A random‐ and fixed‐effects model was used to calculate unadjusted odds ratios (OR) for all predictors. A total of 78 studies, recruiting 31 261 patients were included in the final analysis. Overall, 6212 patients required a PPM, with a mean of 18.9% PPM per study and net rate ranging from 0.16% to 51%. The pooled estimates on a random‐effects model indicated significantly higher odds of post‐TAVR PPM implantation for men (OR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.04–1.28); for patients with baseline mobitz type‐1 second‐degree atrioventricular block (OR, 3.13; 95% CI, 1.64–5.93), left anterior hemiblock (OR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.09–1.86), bifascicular block (OR, 2.59; 95% CI, 1.52–4.42), right bundle‐branch block (OR, 2.48; 95% CI, 2.17–2.83), and for periprocedural atriorventricular block (OR, 4.17; 95% CI, 2.69–6.46). The mechanically expandable valves had 1.44 (95% CI, 1.18–1.76), while self‐expandable valves had 1.93 (95% CI, 1.42–2.63) fold higher odds of PPM requirement compared with self‐expandable and balloon‐expandable valves, respectively.

Conclusions

Male sex, baseline atrioventricular conduction delays, intraprocedural atrioventricular block, and use of mechanically expandable and self‐expanding prosthesis served as positive predictors of PPM implantation in patients undergoing TAVR.

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

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.

Do Women Require Less Permanent Pacemaker After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation? A Meta-Analysis and Meta-Regression

Background

Limited clinical evidence and literature are available about the potential impact of sex on permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). The aim of this work was to evaluate the relationship between sexes and atrioventricular conduction disturbances requiring PPI after TAVI.

Methods and Results

Data were obtained from 46 studies from PubMed reporting information about the impact of patient sex on PPI after TAVI. Total proportions with 95% Cls were reported. Funnel plot and Egger test were used for estimation of publication bias. The primary end point was 30‐day or in‐hospital PPI after TAVI, with odds ratios and 95% CIs extracted. A total of 70 313 patients were included, with a cumulative proportion of 51.5% of women (35 691 patients; 95% CI, 50.2–52.7). The proportion of women undergoing TAVI dropped significantly over time (P<0.0001). The cumulative PPI rate was 15.6% (95% CI, 13.3–18.3). The cumulative rate of PPI in women was 14.9% (95% CI, 12.6–17.6), lower than in men (16.6%; 95% CI, 14.2–19.4). The risk for post‐TAVI PPI was lower in women (odds ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.84–0.96 [P=0.0022]). By meta‐regression analysis, age (P=0.874) and ventricular function (P=0.302) were not significantly associated with PPI among the sexes. Balloon‐expandable TAVI significantly decrease the advantage of women for PPI, approaching the same rate as in men (P=0.0061).

Conclusions

Female sex is associated with a reduced rate of PPI after TAVI, without influence of age or ventricular function. Balloon‐expandable devices attenuate this advantage in favor of women. Additional investigations are warranted to elucidate sex‐based differences in developing conduction disturbances after TAVI.

Effect of pre-existing left bundle branch block on post-procedural outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a meta-analysis of comparative studies

BACKGROUND

As an established procedure for patients with aortic valve stenosis and a high surgical risk profile, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) can be associated with conductance abnormalities. However, data regarding the impact of pre-existing left bundle branch block (LBBB) on post-TAVR outcome is scarce.

OBJECTIVES

We conducted this meta-analysis to pool available data in the literature on the impact of pre-existing LBBB on the clinical outcomes of patients undergoing TAVR.

METHODS

We queried Medline/PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library to identify comparative studies of patients with and without a pre-existing LBBB undergoing TAVR for aortic stenosis. Risk ratio (RR) and the corresponding 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were estimated to measure the effect of pre-existing LBBB on developing post-procedure stroke, permanent pacemaker implantation (PPM), or moderate/severe aortic regurgitation (AR).

RESULTS

Data of three clinical trials encompassing 4,668 patients undergoing TAVR were included in this meta-analysis. Patients with pre-existing LBBB prior to TAVR had an increased risk of developing moderate/severe AR (RR = 1.04 [0.79-1.37]; P = 0.77), stroke (RR = 1.72 [0.61-4.85]; P = 0.31), and a need for PPM implantation (RR = 4.43 [0.43-45.64]; P = 0.21) following TAVR.

CONCLUSION

Preexisting LBBB seems to increase the risk of developing stroke, aortic regurgitation, and the need for a permanent pacemaker implantation. However, due to scarcity of data and high heterogeneity among the current studies, further clinical trials are warranted.

Immediate and long-term need for permanent cardiac pacing following aortic valve replacement

Introduction: Atrioventricular (AV) node conduction disturbances are common following surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), and in some cases the patient needs a permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation before discharge from hospital. Little is known about the long-term need for PPM and the PPM dependency of these individuals. We determined the incidence of PPM implantation before and after discharge in SAVR patients. Methods: We studied 557 consecutive patients who underwent SAVR for aortic stenosis in Iceland between 2002 and 2016. Timing and indication for PPM were registered, with a new concept, ventricular pacing proportion (VPP), defined as ventricular pacing ≥90% of the time, being used to approximate pacemaker dependency. The median follow-up time was 73 months. We plotted the cumulative incidence of pacemaker implantation, treating death as a competing risk. Results: Of the 557 patients, 22 (3.9%) received PPM in the first 30 days after surgery, most commonly for complete AV block (n = 14) or symptomatic bradycardia (n = 8); Thirty-eight other patients (6.8%) had a PPM implanted >30 days postoperatively, at a median of 43 months after surgery (range 0‒181), most often for AV block (n = 13) or sick-sinus syndrome (n = 10). The cumulative incidence of PPM implantation at 1, 5, and 10 years postoperatively was 5.0%, 9.2%, and 12.3%, respectively. During follow-up, 45.0% of the 60 patients had VPP ≥90%. Conclusion: The cumulative incidence of permanent pacemaker implantation following SAVR was about 12% at 10 years, with every other patient having VPP ≥90% during follow-up. This suggests that AV node conduction disturbances extend significantly beyond the perioperative period.

Permanent Pacemaker Implantation After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Cost Analysis

Background

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) can be complicated with a complete atrioventricular block requiring permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation. The cost of index hospitalization for such patients is higher than usual. However, the magnitude of this increased cost is uncertain. We have looked at our five-year TAVR experience to analyze the detailed cost for PPM implantation in TAVR.

Methods

This study is a retrospective analysis of patients undergoing TAVR at our tertiary care center from December 2012 to April 2018. The initial sample size was 449. We excluded patients with prior PPM or an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (37). Patients who had their procedure aborted or required a cardiopulmonary bypass (16) and those with missing data variables (14) were excluded. The final sample size was 382. The cost for admission was calculated as the US dollars incurred by the hospital. Cohort costs were categorized as a direct cost, which is patient based, and an indirect cost, which represents overhead costs and is independent of patient volume. Patients were divided into two groups based on the placement of PPM after TAVR. Chi-square test, t-test, and logistic linear regression were used for the statistical analysis.

Results

Of 382 patients, 19 (4.9%) required PPM after TAVR. Baseline variables, including age, gender, and BMI, were not statistically significant. The PPM group had a significantly longer intensive care unit (ICU) stay (48.6 hours vs. 36.7 hours; p<0.001) and total stay in the hospital (4.2 days vs. 3.4 days; p=0.047). PPM implantation after TAVR increased cost on an average of $10,213 more than a typical TAVR admission (p=0.04). The direct cost was also significantly high for the PPM group ($7,087; p=0.02). On detailed analysis, almost all major cost categories showed a higher cost for pacemaker patients when compared with control.

Conclusions

PPM implantation adds a significant cost burden to TAVR admissions.

[Cardiac implantable electronic devices and health-related quality of life]

Patients, scientists and healthcare providers are increasingly interested in identifying interventions that not only reduce mortality but also improve symptoms, function and health-related quality of life. Health-related quality of life is a strong, independent predictor of mortality, cardiovascular events, hospitalization and treatment costs in patients with cardiac diseases. Remote monitoring of pacemakers has a positive effect on health-related quality of life and functional capacity and is equivalent to monitoring these patients in hospitals. Implantation of an implantable cardioverter defibrillator has a major impact on mental health, with the majority of patients experiencing the fear of ICD shocks as particularly detrimental to the quality of life. Variables, such as age, gender and duration of implantation should be considered in the assessment and planning of strategies for improving the quality of life of patients with electronic implantable cardiac devices.