Permanent Pacemaker Implantation Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Outcomes in patients with electrocardiographic left ventricular dyssynchrony following transcatheter aortic valve replacement

BACKGROUND

Left bundle branch block (LBBB) and atrioventricular (AV) conduction abnormalities requiring permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation occur frequently following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). The resultant left ventricular (LV) dyssynchrony may be associated with adverse clinical events.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to assess the adverse outcomes associated with LV dyssynchrony due to high-burden right ventricular (RV) pacing or permanent LBBB following TAVR in patients with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF).

METHODS

Consecutive TAVR patients at the University of Michigan from January 2012 to June 2017 were included. Pre-existing cardiac implantable electronic device, previous LBBB, LVEF <50%, or follow-up period <1 year were excluded. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included cardiomyopathy (defined as LVEF ≤45%), a composite endpoint of cardiomyopathy or all-cause mortality, and the change in LVEF at 1-year follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 362 patients were analyzed (mean age 77 years). LV dyssynchrony group (n = 91 [25.1%]) included 56 permanent LBBB patients, 12 permanent LBBB patients with PPM, and 23 non-LBBB patients with PPM and high-burden RV pacing. Remaining patients served as control (n = 271 [74.9%]). After adjusted analysis, LV dyssynchrony had significantly higher all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 2.16; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07-4.37) and cardiomyopathy (adjusted HR 14.80; 95% CI 6.31-14.69). The LV dyssynchrony group had mean LVEF decline of 10.5% ± 10.2% compared to a small increase (0.5% ± 7.7%) in control.

CONCLUSION

Among TAVR patients with preserved LVEF and normal AV conduction, development of postprocedural LV dyssynchrony secondary to high-burden RV pacing or permanent LBBB was associated with significantly higher risk of death and cardiomyopathy at 1-year follow-up.

Predictors of pacemaker dependency in patients implanted with a pacemaker after Transaortic valve replacement

Introduction and objectives

The development of complete AV block and the need for pacemaker implantation (PM) is the most frequent complication after Transaortic valve replacement (TAVR). In other PM clinical contexts, a higher percentage of ventricular stimulation has been associated with worse prognosis. The objective was to study the existence of predictors of PM dependence.

Methods

We identified 96 consecutive patients who had received a PM post-TAVR (all Core-Valve). We retrospectively analyzed this cohort with the aim of identifying predictors of a high and very high percentage of ventricular pacing (VP), PM dependency and survival.

Results

The mean age was 82.3 years, with a mean logistic EuroSCORE of 17.1, 53% were women and 12% of patients had LVEF < 50%. The indication was complete AV block in 40.5%, and LBBB in 59.5%. Mean survival was 62.7 months, IQR [54.4-71]. The only independent predictor of mortality was the pre-TAVR logistic Euro-SCORE (RR = 1,026, p = 0.033), but not LVEF < 50%, VP > 50%, VP > 85% or PM dependence. In 73 patients PM rhythm was documented at the end of follow-up. Of these, 14 (19.2%) were considered dependent, and 37 (50.7%) presented VP > 50%. The post-TAVR complete AV block recovery rate was 67.8%. In multivariate analysis, female sex (HR = 5.6, p = 0.005), and indication of complete AV block vs. LBBB (HR = 15.7, p = 0.017) were independently associated with PM dependency.

Conclusions

Female sex and indication due to complete AV block were independent predictors of PM dependency during follow up. In our series of patients with mostly normal LVEF, a high percentage of stimulation does not influence prognosis.

Transvascular transcatheter aortic valve implantation in 2017

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is emerging as the standard of care for patients with severe aortic stenosis. Recent results have been favourable even for patients with low periprocedural risk.

METHODS

We analysed the number of procedures, complications, and in-hospital mortality rates of all patients undergoing isolated aortic valve replacement in 2017 in Germany, focussing especially on transvascular (TV) TAVI. Patients were stratified according the German Aortic Valve Score (AKL) into the risk classes low, intermediate, high and very high (≥ 10%).

RESULTS

A total of 17,956 TV-TAVI and 9011 isolated surgical aortic valve replacements (iSAVR) were performed in Germany in 2017. Although the total rate of intraprocedural complications after TV-TAVI was the same as in 2016 (both 7.4%), fewer patients experienced an arterial vascular complication in 2017 (2017: 6.0%; 2016: 7.1%; p < 0.001). Likewise, the rate of new pacemaker implantation decreased (2017: 9.6%; 2016:11.4%; p < 0.001). In-hospital mortality after TV-TAVI and iSAVR was equal (2.7%) in 2017, despite the much higher risk profile of TV-TAVI patients. Using the AKL score as reference, TV-TAVI showed a more favourable observed-to-expected mortality (O/E) ratio (0.89) than iSAVR (1.14)- even more pronounced in patients at low risk (0.81 vs. 1.14).

CONCLUSIONS

The rates of major complications like bleeding and permanent pacemaker implantation after TV-TAVI keep declining. In 2017 patients undergoing TV-TAVI had a low in-hospital mortality rate with an O/E ratio < 1, indicating that the results were again better than those of all TAVI and SAVR of the previous year. Overall in-hospital mortality after transvascular TAVI and isolated aortic valve repair 2017 in Germany stratified to risk groups by the German Aortic Valve Score (German AV Score/AKL Score): low risk group (AKL 0- < 3%), intermediate risk group (AKL 3- < 6%), high risk group (AKL 6- < 10%) and very high risk group (AKL ≥ 10%).

Pacemaker implantation after transcatheter aortic valve: why is this still happening?

During the past years, the industry and most transcatheter aortic valve operators have focused on reduction of paravalvular leaks rather than on the reduction of permanent pacemakers (PPM). However, since indication for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is moving toward a healthier and younger patient population, new PPMs may become more of an issue. Certain factors such as pre-existing conduction disorders or anatomical features cannot be changed. However, the amount of mechanical trauma to the conduction system and periprocedural medical management offers the potential for optimization. By optimizing our procedure, we may finally be able to achieve low, surgical-like, PPM rates.

Clinical and Echocardiographic Outcomes Following Permanent Pacemaker Implantation After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Meta-Analysis and Meta-Regression

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement has become the procedure of choice for inoperable, high-risk, and many intermediate-risk patients with aortic stenosis. Conduction abnormalities are a common finding after transcatheter aortic valve replacement and often result in permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation. Data pertaining to the clinical impact of PPM implantation are controversial. We used meta-analysis techniques to summarize the effect of PPM implantation on clinical and echocardiographic outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Data were summarized as Mantel-Haenszel relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for dichotomous variables and as standardized mean difference and 95% CI for continuous variables We used the Higgins I² statistic to evaluate heterogeneity. We found that patients with and without PPM have similar all-cause mortality (RR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.70-1.03), cardiovascular mortality (RR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.59-1.18), myocardial infarction (RR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.20-1.11), and stroke (RR, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.70-2.26) at 30 days. The groups were also comparable in all-cause mortality (RR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.92-1.16), cardiovascular mortality (RR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.39-1.24), myocardial infarction (RR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.30-1.13), and stroke (RR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.47-1.04) at 1 year. We observed that the improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction was significantly greater in the patients without PPM (standardized mean difference, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.12-0.32).

CONCLUSIONS

PPM implantation is not associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, stroke, or myocardial infarction both at short- and long-term follow-up. However, PPM is associated with impaired left ventricular ejection fraction recovery post-transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

Pacemaker implantation after TAVI: predictors of AV block persistence

AIMS

Approximately every fifth patient undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) requires a permanent pacemaker (PPM) after the procedure. The aim of this study was to analyse predictors of atrioventricular block III° (AVBIII) persistence with concurrent PPM dependency after TAVI.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Between 2010 and 2015 a total of 1198 patients underwent TAVI at the Kerckhoff Heart and Thorax Center, Germany. After exclusion of patients with prior PPM (n = 173) 14.7% (n = 176) of the patients underwent PPM implantation after the procedure. Independent predictors of PPM implantation were pre-existing right bundle branch block (RBBB, p < 0.001) and implantation of a CoreValve prosthesis (p < 0.001). A subgroup of patients with a newly implanted PPM (n = 102) were followed-up for a median of 73 (IQR 62-85) days. The leading indication for PPM implantation was AVBIII in 74.5% (76/102). Of these patients only 22.4% (17/76) had persistent AVBIII at follow-up. Predictors of AVBIII persistence were prior RBBB (p = 0.04), postdilatation (p = 0.006) and higher mean aortic valve gradient prior to implantation (p = 0.013). PPMs were implanted earlier in patients with persisting AVBIII [1 day (IQR0-2.5) vs. 4 days (IQR2-7); p < 0.001]. Early PPM implantation after TAVI was the only independent predictor of persistent AVBIII [OR 1.36 (95% 1.05-1.75); p = 0.02].

CONCLUSION

The long-term persistence of AVBIII is generally low after TAVI. Therefore, it may be wise to postpone the indication for PPM implantation for a couple of days. The only predictors of a lack of recovery of the AVB are prior RBBB, higher mean aortic valve gradients and postdilatation of the prosthesis.

Diastolic mitral regurgitation following transcatheter aortic valve replacement: Incidence, predictors, and association with clinical outcomes

BACKGROUND

Diastolic mitral regurgitation (DMR) results from atrioventricular conduction disturbances, acute aortic regurgitation, and/or marked elevation of left ventricular filling pressure. Generally benign, in some clinical circumstances DMR has presumed to result in hemodynamic decompensation. The aforementioned causes of DMR are frequently encountered in patients treated by transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) but its clinical significance in this setting has not been studied. We sought to investigate the incidence of DMR and its prognostic implications following TAVR.

METHODS

Baseline clinical and echocardiographic variables from a prospective TAVR registry were analyzed to determine the correlates of post-procedural DMR and its impact on late outcomes (all-cause mortality and the composite of mortality and readmission due to heart failure).

RESULTS

Of 267 patients undergoing TAVR, post-procedural DMR was present in 25 (9.3%). Independent predictors of DMR included pacemaker implantation [OR=2.7 (95%CI 1.03-6.50)], post-procedural systolic MR and aortic regurgitation [OR=3.7 (1.20-10.80) and OR=4.1 (1.50-10.60), respectively], and use of self-expanding bioprostheses [OR=4.9 (1.60-21.0)]. The incidence of the combined endpoint of death and/or readmission for heart failure was higher in patients with versus those without DMR (25% vs. 41%, respectively, p=0.08), although this association did not attain statistical significance on multivariable analyses. Interaction term analysis indicated a trend toward a heightened risk for the composite endpoint among patients with post-procedural aortic regurgitation (≥moderate) in whom DMR occurred (χ² 2.94, p=0.09).

CONCLUSIONS

Although DMR following TAVR is common (occurring in approximately 1 of 10 patients), it is not independently associated with an increased risk of death and/or readmission for heart failure. Therefore, DMR post TAVR is more likely a marker of cardiac dysfunction than a causative factor.

[Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI): Current perspectives]

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has evolved as the treatment modality of choice for elderly patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis who are at high risk for surgery. More than 10,000 TAVI procedures were undertaken in Germany during 2014.A mortality benefit has been shown for TAVI compared with conservative treatment in patients deemed inoperable, and the procedure was proven to be at least non-inferior to surgical aortic valve replacement in high-risk patients. Through improvements in preprocedural imaging and in valve technology as well as increasing operator and surgical team experience, TAVI has developed rapidly in the past few years. Complication rates declinded considerably and the latest study results even suggest a superiority of TAVI to surgical valve replacement in patients at intermediate operative risk. Nevertheless, the challenge to avoid procedure-specific complications influencing the outcome still remains. Therefore, making an individual decision about the approach and the valve prosthesis in an interdisciplinary heart team consisting of a cardiologist and a cardiac surgeon is indispensable for guaranteeing the best therapy for the patient.Considering the rapid developments and procedural improvements in this field, randomized trials are required to assess whether the indication for TAVI may be extended to patients at lower perioperative risk in the future.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Lower-Risk Patients With Aortic Stenosis

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation underwent progressive improvements until it became the default therapy for inoperable patients, and a recommended therapy in high-risk operable patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis. In the lower-risk patient strata, a currently costly therapy that still has important complications with questionable durability is competing with the established effective and still-improving surgical replacement. This report tries to weigh the clinical evidence, the recent technical improvements, the durability, and the cost-effectiveness claims supporting the adoption of transcatheter aortic valve implantation in intermediate-low risk patients. The importance of appropriate patients’ risk stratification and a more comprehensive approach to estimate that risk are also emphasized in the present report.