1
|
Pajareya P, Srisomwong S, Siranart N, Kaewkanha P, Chumpangern Y, Prasitlumkum N, Kewchareon J, Chokesuwattanaskul R, Tokavanich N. Implantation of a permanent pacemaker following orthotopic heart transplantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Interv Card Electrophysiol 2024:10.1007/s10840-024-01909-5. [PMID: 39190212 DOI: 10.1007/s10840-024-01909-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/22/2024] [Accepted: 08/14/2024] [Indexed: 08/28/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Orthotopic heart transplant (OHT) is among the final armamentariums for end-stage heart disease. Many patients who have had OHT require a post-transplant permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation due to an abnormal conduction system. We aimed to evaluate the risk of mortality and acute rejection in patients with OHT who had received PPM compared to patients without PPM and to determine predictors for PPM placement in this population. METHODS We comprehensively searched for studies from MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases from inception to September 2023. Inclusion criteria focused on patients who had undergone OHT and PPM implantation post-transplant. Data from each study were combined using a random-effects model. Results were expressed as relative risk (RR) or odd ratios (OR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS A total of 9 studies were included in this meta-analysis incorporating a total of 54,848 patients (3.3% had PPM). The pooled all-cause mortality rate among patients with PPM post-OHT was 26% (95% CI: 19-33%, I2 = 1%). There were no differences between post-heart transplant patients with PPM and those without PPM in risk of all-cause mortality (RR 0.76, 95% CI: 0.43-1.34; I2 = 45%) and acute rejection (RR 1.22, 95% CI: 0.74-2.00, I2 = 59%). Bi-atrial anastomosis was associated with an increased risk of PPM implantation post-OHT (OR 7.74, 95% CI: 3.55-16.91, I2 = 0%), while pre-OHT mechanical circulatory support (MCS) was associated with a decreased risk of PPM implantation post-OHT (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.27-0.76, I2 = 0%). CONCLUSION There were no significant differences in all-cause mortality or acute rejection between post-OHT recipients who required PPM compared to those who did not receive PPM. Further, bi-atrial anastomosis portended the need for PPM implantation, while MCS was associated with a decreased occurrence of PPM.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Patavee Pajareya
- Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Center of Excellence in Arrhythmia Research, Cardiac Center, Faculty of Medicine, King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand
| | - Sathapana Srisomwong
- Faculty of Medicine, Vajira Hospital, Navamindradhiraj University, Bangkok, Thailand
| | - Noppachai Siranart
- Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Center of Excellence in Arrhythmia Research, Cardiac Center, Faculty of Medicine, King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand
- Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, USA
| | - Ponthakorn Kaewkanha
- Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Center of Excellence in Arrhythmia Research, Cardiac Center, Faculty of Medicine, King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand
| | - Yanisa Chumpangern
- Faculty of Medicine, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
| | | | - Jakrin Kewchareon
- Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Loma Linda University Health, Loma Linda, California, USA
| | - Ronpichai Chokesuwattanaskul
- Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Center of Excellence in Arrhythmia Research, Cardiac Center, Faculty of Medicine, King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
| | - Nithi Tokavanich
- Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Frankel Cardiovascular Center, University of Michigan Health, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Rosenthal LL, Grinninger C, Pozza RD, Fischer M, Zimmerling L, Ulrich SM, Kari FA, Haas NA, Michel S, Hörer J, Hagl C. Impact of the operative technique on mid- and long-term results following paediatric heart transplantation. ESC Heart Fail 2024; 11:1602-1611. [PMID: 38378979 PMCID: PMC11098630 DOI: 10.1002/ehf2.14718] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/10/2023] [Revised: 12/14/2023] [Accepted: 01/18/2024] [Indexed: 02/22/2024] Open
Abstract
AIMS The aim of this study is to evaluate and compare the impact of the bicaval technique versus the biatrial technique (by Lower and Shumway) in paediatric heart transplant patients. Only a few studies investigate this matter regarding the long-term outcome after paediatric heart transplantation. We compared the two surgical methods regarding survival, the necessity of pacemaker implantation. METHODS AND RESULTS All 134 patients (aged <18 years) - (group-1) biatrial (n = 84), versus (group-2) bicaval (n = 50), who underwent heart transplantation between October 1988 and December 2021, were analysed. Freedom from events were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Potential differences were analysed using the log rank test and Cox proportional hazard models. Mean ± standard deviation: Bypass time (per minutes) was higher in the group 1 as compared with group 2 (P = 0.050). Survival was not significantly different (P = 0.604) in either groups. Eighteen patients required permanent pacemaker implantation in the group 1 and only one patient required it in the group 2 (P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS Paediatric heart transplantation using bicaval technique results similar long-term survival compared with the biatrial technique. The incidence of atrial rhythm disorders was significantly higher in the biatrial group, requiring a higher frequency of pacemaker implantation in this group. As a results, the bicaval technique has replaced the biatrial technique in our centre.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- L. Lily Rosenthal
- Division for Pediatric and Congenital Heart SurgeryLudwig Maximilian UniversityMunichGermany
- Department of Cardiac SurgeryLudwig Maximilian UniversityMunichGermany
- Munich Heart Alliance (MHA) – DZHK (German Centre for Cardiovascular Research), partner site Munich Heart AllianceMunichGermany
| | - Carola Grinninger
- Department of Cardiac SurgeryLudwig Maximilian UniversityMunichGermany
| | - Robert Dalla Pozza
- Department of Congenital and Pediatric Herat Surgery, German Herat Center MunichTechnische Universität MünchenMunichGermany
| | - Marcus Fischer
- Department of Congenital and Pediatric Herat Surgery, German Herat Center MunichTechnische Universität MünchenMunichGermany
| | - Linda Zimmerling
- Division for Pediatric and Congenital Heart SurgeryLudwig Maximilian UniversityMunichGermany
- Department of Cardiac SurgeryLudwig Maximilian UniversityMunichGermany
| | - Sarah M. Ulrich
- Department of Congenital and Pediatric Herat Surgery, German Herat Center MunichTechnische Universität MünchenMunichGermany
| | - Fabian A. Kari
- Division for Pediatric and Congenital Heart SurgeryLudwig Maximilian UniversityMunichGermany
- Department of Cardiac SurgeryLudwig Maximilian UniversityMunichGermany
- Munich Heart Alliance (MHA) – DZHK (German Centre for Cardiovascular Research), partner site Munich Heart AllianceMunichGermany
| | - Nikolaus A. Haas
- Department of Congenital and Pediatric Herat Surgery, German Herat Center MunichTechnische Universität MünchenMunichGermany
| | - Sebastian Michel
- Division for Pediatric and Congenital Heart SurgeryLudwig Maximilian UniversityMunichGermany
- Department of Cardiac SurgeryLudwig Maximilian UniversityMunichGermany
- Munich Heart Alliance (MHA) – DZHK (German Centre for Cardiovascular Research), partner site Munich Heart AllianceMunichGermany
| | - Jürgen Hörer
- Division for Pediatric and Congenital Heart SurgeryLudwig Maximilian UniversityMunichGermany
- Munich Heart Alliance (MHA) – DZHK (German Centre for Cardiovascular Research), partner site Munich Heart AllianceMunichGermany
| | - Christian Hagl
- Department of Cardiac SurgeryLudwig Maximilian UniversityMunichGermany
- Department for Pediatric Cardiology and Intensive CareLudwig Maximilian UniversityMunichGermany
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Shah MJ, Silka MJ, Avari Silva JN, Balaji S, Beach CM, Benjamin MN, Berul CI, Cannon B, Cecchin F, Cohen MI, Dalal AS, Dechert BE, Foster A, Gebauer R, Gonzalez Corcia MC, Kannankeril PJ, Karpawich PP, Kim JJ, Krishna MR, Kubuš P, LaPage MJ, Mah DY, Malloy-Walton L, Miyazaki A, Motonaga KS, Niu MC, Olen M, Paul T, Rosenthal E, Saarel EV, Silvetti MS, Stephenson EA, Tan RB, Triedman J, Von Bergen NH, Wackel PL. 2021 PACES expert consensus statement on the indications and management of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices in pediatric patients. Indian Pacing Electrophysiol J 2021; 21:367-393. [PMID: 34333141 PMCID: PMC8577100 DOI: 10.1016/j.ipej.2021.07.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/10/2023] Open
Abstract
In view of the increasing complexity of both cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) and patients in the current era, practice guidelines, by necessity, have become increasingly specific. This document is an expert consensus statement that has been developed to update and further delineate indications and management of CIEDs in pediatric patients, defined as ≤21 years of age, and is intended to focus primarily on the indications for CIEDs in the setting of specific disease categories. The document also highlights variations between previously published adult and pediatric CIED recommendations and provides rationale for underlying important differences. The document addresses some of the deterrents to CIED access in low- and middle-income countries and strategies to circumvent them. The document sections were divided up and drafted by the writing committee members according to their expertise. The recommendations represent the consensus opinion of the entire writing committee, graded by class of recommendation and level of evidence. Several questions addressed in this document either do not lend themselves to clinical trials or are rare disease entities, and in these instances recommendations are based on consensus expert opinion. Furthermore, specific recommendations, even when supported by substantial data, do not replace the need for clinical judgment and patient-specific decision-making. The recommendations were opened for public comment to Pediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society (PACES) members and underwent external review by the scientific and clinical document committee of the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the science advisory and coordinating committee of the American Heart Association (AHA), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), and the Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC). The document received endorsement by all the collaborators and the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), the Indian Heart Rhythm Society (IHRS), and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS). This document is expected to provide support for clinicians and patients to allow for appropriate CIED use, appropriate CIED management, and appropriate CIED follow-up in pediatric patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maully J Shah
- University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
| | - Michael J Silka
- University of Southern California Keck School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
| | | | | | | | - Monica N Benjamin
- Hospital de Pediatría Juan P. Garrahan, Hospital El Cruce, Hospital Británico de Buenos Aires, Instituto Cardiovascular ICBA, Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | | | | | - Frank Cecchin
- New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA
| | | | - Aarti S Dalal
- Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, USA
| | | | - Anne Foster
- Advocate Children's Heart Institute, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Roman Gebauer
- Heart Centre Leipzig, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany
| | | | | | - Peter P Karpawich
- University Pediatricians, Children's Hospital of Michigan, Detroit, MI, USA
| | | | | | - Peter Kubuš
- Children's Heart Center, Charles University in Prague and Motol University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
| | | | | | | | - Aya Miyazaki
- Shizuoka General Hospital and Mt. Fuji Shizuoka Children's Hospital, Shizuoka, Japan
| | | | - Mary C Niu
- University of Utah Health Sciences Center, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
| | | | - Thomas Paul
- Georg-August-University Medical Center, Göttingen, Germany
| | - Eric Rosenthal
- Evelina London Children's Hospital and St Thomas' Hospital, Guy's & St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | | | | | | | - Reina B Tan
- New York University Langone Health, New York, NY, USA
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Shah MJ, Silka MJ, Silva JNA, Balaji S, Beach CM, Benjamin MN, Berul CI, Cannon B, Cecchin F, Cohen MI, Dalal AS, Dechert BE, Foster A, Gebauer R, Gonzalez Corcia MC, Kannankeril PJ, Karpawich PP, Kim JJ, Krishna MR, Kubuš P, LaPage MJ, Mah DY, Malloy-Walton L, Miyazaki A, Motonaga KS, Niu MC, Olen M, Paul T, Rosenthal E, Saarel EV, Silvetti MS, Stephenson EA, Tan RB, Triedman J, Bergen NHV, Wackel PL. 2021 PACES Expert Consensus Statement on the Indications and Management of Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Devices in Pediatric Patients: Developed in collaboration with and endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), the American Heart Association (AHA), and the Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC) Endorsed by the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), the Indian Heart Rhythm Society (IHRS), and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS). JACC Clin Electrophysiol 2021; 7:1437-1472. [PMID: 34794667 DOI: 10.1016/j.jacep.2021.07.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/10/2023]
Abstract
In view of the increasing complexity of both cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) and patients in the current era, practice guidelines, by necessity, have become increasingly specific. This document is an expert consensus statement that has been developed to update and further delineate indications and management of CIEDs in pediatric patients, defined as ≤21 years of age, and is intended to focus primarily on the indications for CIEDs in the setting of specific disease categories. The document also highlights variations between previously published adult and pediatric CIED recommendations and provides rationale for underlying important differences. The document addresses some of the deterrents to CIED access in low- and middle-income countries and strategies to circumvent them. The document sections were divided up and drafted by the writing committee members according to their expertise. The recommendations represent the consensus opinion of the entire writing committee, graded by class of recommendation and level of evidence. Several questions addressed in this document either do not lend themselves to clinical trials or are rare disease entities, and in these instances recommendations are based on consensus expert opinion. Furthermore, specific recommendations, even when supported by substantial data, do not replace the need for clinical judgment and patient-specific decision-making. The recommendations were opened for public comment to Pediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society (PACES) members and underwent external review by the scientific and clinical document committee of the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the science advisory and coordinating committee of the American Heart Association (AHA), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), and the Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC). The document received endorsement by all the collaborators and the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), the Indian Heart Rhythm Society (IHRS), and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS). This document is expected to provide support for clinicians and patients to allow for appropriate CIED use, appropriate CIED management, and appropriate CIED follow-up in pediatric patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maully J Shah
- University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
| | - Michael J Silka
- University of Southern California Keck School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California, USA.
| | | | | | | | - Monica N Benjamin
- Hospital de Pediatría Juan P. Garrahan, Hospital El Cruce, Hospital Británico de Buenos Aires, Instituto Cardiovascular ICBA, Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | | | | | - Frank Cecchin
- New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, New York, USA
| | | | - Aarti S Dalal
- Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, USA
| | | | - Anne Foster
- Advocate Children's Heart Institute, Chicago, Illinois, USA
| | - Roman Gebauer
- Heart Centre Leipzig, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany
| | | | | | - Peter P Karpawich
- University Pediatricians, Children's Hospital of Michigan, Detroit, Michigan, USA
| | | | | | - Peter Kubuš
- Children's Heart Center, Charles University in Prague and Motol University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
| | | | | | | | - Aya Miyazaki
- Shizuoka General Hospital and Mt. Fuji Shizuoka Children's Hospital, Shizuoka, Japan
| | | | - Mary C Niu
- University of Utah Health Sciences Center, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
| | - Melissa Olen
- Nicklaus Children's Hospital, Miami, Florida, USA
| | - Thomas Paul
- Georg-August-University Medical Center, Göttingen, Germany
| | - Eric Rosenthal
- Evelina London Children's Hospital and St Thomas' Hospital, Guy's & St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | | | | | | | - Reina B Tan
- New York University Langone Health, New York, New York, USA
| | | | - Nicholas H Von Bergen
- University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
2021 PACES expert consensus statement on the indications and management of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices in pediatric patients. Cardiol Young 2021; 31:1738-1769. [PMID: 34338183 DOI: 10.1017/s1047951121003413] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/10/2023]
Abstract
In view of the increasing complexity of both cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) and patients in the current era, practice guidelines, by necessity, have become increasingly specific. This document is an expert consensus statement that has been developed to update and further delineate indications and management of CIEDs in pediatric patients, defined as ≤21 years of age, and is intended to focus primarily on the indications for CIEDs in the setting of specific disease categories. The document also highlights variations between previously published adult and pediatric CIED recommendations and provides rationale for underlying important differences. The document addresses some of the deterrents to CIED access in low- and middle-income countries and strategies to circumvent them. The document sections were divided up and drafted by the writing committee members according to their expertise. The recommendations represent the consensus opinion of the entire writing committee, graded by class of recommendation and level of evidence. Several questions addressed in this document either do not lend themselves to clinical trials or are rare disease entities, and in these instances recommendations are based on consensus expert opinion. Furthermore, specific recommendations, even when supported by substantial data, do not replace the need for clinical judgment and patient-specific decision-making. The recommendations were opened for public comment to Pediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society (PACES) members and underwent external review by the scientific and clinical document committee of the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the science advisory and coordinating committee of the American Heart Association (AHA), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), and the Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC). The document received endorsement by all the collaborators and the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), the Indian Heart Rhythm Society (IHRS), and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS). This document is expected to provide support for clinicians and patients to allow for appropriate CIED use, appropriate CIED management, and appropriate CIED follow-up in pediatric patients.
Collapse
|
6
|
Shah MJ, Silka MJ, Silva JA, Balaji S, Beach C, Benjamin M, Berul C, Cannon B, Cecchin F, Cohen M, Dalal A, Dechert B, Foster A, Gebauer R, Gonzalez Corcia MC, Kannankeril P, Karpawich P, Kim J, Krishna MR, Kubuš P, Malloy-Walton L, LaPage M, Mah D, Miyazaki A, Motonaga K, Niu M, Olen M, Paul T, Rosenthal E, Saarel E, Silvetti MS, Stephenson E, Tan R, Triedman J, Von Bergen N, Wackel P. 2021 PACES Expert Consensus Statement on the Indications and Management of Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Devices in Pediatric Patients. Heart Rhythm 2021; 18:1888-1924. [PMID: 34363988 DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2021.07.038] [Citation(s) in RCA: 41] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/15/2021] [Accepted: 07/15/2021] [Indexed: 01/10/2023]
Abstract
In view of the increasing complexity of both cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) and patients in the current era, practice guidelines, by necessity, have become increasingly specific. This document is an expert consensus statement that has been developed to update and further delineate indications and management of CIEDs in pediatric patients, defined as ≤21 years of age, and is intended to focus primarily on the indications for CIEDs in the setting of specific disease categories. The document also highlights variations between previously published adult and pediatric CIED recommendations and provides rationale for underlying important differences. The document addresses some of the deterrents to CIED access in low- and middle-income countries and strategies to circumvent them. The document sections were divided up and drafted by the writing committee members according to their expertise. The recommendations represent the consensus opinion of the entire writing committee, graded by class of recommendation and level of evidence. Several questions addressed in this document either do not lend themselves to clinical trials or are rare disease entities, and in these instances recommendations are based on consenus expert opinion. Furthermore, specific recommendations, even when supported by substantial data, do not replace the need for clinical judgment and patient-specific decision-making. The recommendations were opened for public comment to Pediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society (PACES) members and underwent external review by the scientific and clinical document committee of the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the science advisory and coordinating committee of the American Heart Association (AHA), the American College of Cardiology, (ACC) and the Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC). The document received endorsement by all the collaborators and the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), the Indian Heart Rhythm Society (IHRS), and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS). This document is expected to provide support for clinicians and patients to allow for appropriate CIED use, appropriate CIED management, and appropriate follow-up in pediatric patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maully J Shah
- University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
| | - Michael J Silka
- University of Southern California Keck School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California.
| | | | | | - Cheyenne Beach
- Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut
| | - Monica Benjamin
- Hospital de Pediatría Juan P. Garrahan, Hospital El Cruce, Hospital Británico de Buenos Aires, Instituto Cardiovascular ICBA, Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | | | | | - Frank Cecchin
- New York Univeristy Grossman School of Medicine, New York, New York
| | | | - Aarti Dalal
- Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri
| | | | - Anne Foster
- Advocate Children's Heart Institute, Chicago, Illinois
| | - Roman Gebauer
- Heart Centre Leipzig, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany
| | | | | | - Peter Karpawich
- University Pediatricians, Children's Hospital of Michigan, Detroit, Michigan
| | | | | | - Peter Kubuš
- Children's Heart Center, Charles University in Prague and Motol University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
| | | | | | - Doug Mah
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachussetts
| | - Aya Miyazaki
- Shizuoka General Hospital and Mt. Fuji Shizuoka Children's Hospital, Shizuoka, Japan
| | | | - Mary Niu
- University of Utah Health Sciences Center, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | | | - Thomas Paul
- Georg-August-University Medical Center, Göttingen, Germany
| | - Eric Rosenthal
- Evelina London Children's Hospital and St Thomas' Hospital, Guy's & St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | | | | | | | - Reina Tan
- New York University Langone Health, New York, New York
| | - John Triedman
- University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Medicine, Kansas City, Missouri
| | - Nicholas Von Bergen
- University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Mylonas KS, Repanas T, Athanasiadis DI, Voulgaridou A, Sfyridis PG, Bakoyiannis C, Kapelouzou A, Avgerinos DV, Tzifa A, Kalangos A. Permanent pacemaker implantation in pediatric heart transplant recipients: A systematic review and evidence quality assessment. Pediatr Transplant 2020; 24:e13698. [PMID: 32189417 DOI: 10.1111/petr.13698] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/15/2019] [Revised: 02/15/2020] [Accepted: 02/22/2020] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
Bradyarrhythmias are a common complication following pediatric OHT and may require permanent pacemaker implantation (PPM). The purpose of this study was to investigate the incidence, predictors, and outcomes of children undergoing PPM implantation following OHT. A PRISMA-compliant systematic literature review was performed using the PubMed database and the Cochrane Library (end-of-search date: January 27, 2019). The Newcastle-Ottawa scale and the Joanna Briggs Institute tool were used to assess the quality of cohort studies and case reports, respectively. We analyzed data from a total of 11 studies recruiting 7198 pediatric patients who underwent heart transplant. PPM implantation was performed in 1.9% (n = 137/7,198; 95% CI: 1.6-2.2) of the patients. Most patients underwent dual-chamber pacing (46%, 95% CI: 32.6-59.7). Male-to-female ratio was 1.3:1. Mean patient age at the time of OHT was 10.1 ± 6.3. Overall, biatrial anastomosis was used in 62.2% (95% CI: 52.8-70.6) of the patients. The bicaval technique was performed in the remaining 37.8% (95% CI: 29.4-47.1). Sinus node dysfunction was the most frequent indication for PPM implantation (54.4%; 95% CI: 42.6-65.7) followed by AV block (45.6%; 95% CI: 34.3-57.3). The median time interval between OHT and PPM implantation ranged from 17 days to 12.5 years. All-cause mortality was 27.9% (95% CI: 18.6-39.6) during a median follow-up of 5 years. PPM implantation is rarely required after pediatric OHT. The most common indication for pacing is sinus node dysfunction, and patients undergoing biatrial anastomosis may be more likely to require PPM.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Konstantinos S Mylonas
- Department of Pediatric Cardiac Surgery, Mitera Children's Hospital, HYGEIA Group, Athens, Greece.,Department of Pediatric Cardiology and Adult Congenital Heart Disease, Mitera Children's Hospital, HYGEIA Group, Athens, Greece
| | | | | | | | - Panagiotis G Sfyridis
- Department of Pediatric Cardiac Surgery, Mitera Children's Hospital, HYGEIA Group, Athens, Greece
| | - Christos Bakoyiannis
- Division of Vascular Surgery, Laikon General Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece
| | - Alkistis Kapelouzou
- Clinical, Experimental Surgery & Translational Research, Biomedical Research Foundation Academy of Athens, Athens, Greece
| | - Dimitrios V Avgerinos
- Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, New York Presbyterian Hospital, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York City, NY, USA
| | - Aphrodite Tzifa
- Department of Pediatric Cardiology and Adult Congenital Heart Disease, Mitera Children's Hospital, HYGEIA Group, Athens, Greece
| | - Afksendiyos Kalangos
- Department of Pediatric Cardiac Surgery, Mitera Children's Hospital, HYGEIA Group, Athens, Greece
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Ustunkaya T, Liang JJ, Lin AN, Shirai Y, Molina M, Owens AT, Acker MA, Bermudez CA, Santangeli P, Nazarian S, Dixit S, Marchlinski FE, Callans DJ. Clinical and procedural characteristics predicting need for chronotropic support and permanent pacing post-heart transplantation. Heart Rhythm 2020; 17:1132-1138. [PMID: 32112873 DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2020.02.021] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/22/2019] [Accepted: 02/14/2020] [Indexed: 10/24/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Postoperative bradycardia can complicate orthotopic heart transplantation (OHT). Previous studies suggested donor age and surgical technique as possible risk factors. However, risk factors in the era of bicaval anastomosis have not been elucidated. OBJECTIVE We sought to examine the association between donor/recipient characteristics with need for chronotropic support and permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation in patients with OHT. METHODS All patients treated with OHT between January 2003 and January 2018 at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania were retrospectively evaluated until June 2018. Chronotropic support was given upon postoperative inability to increase the heart rate to patient's demands and included disproportionate bradycardia and junctional rhythm. RESULTS A total of 820 patients (mean age 51.3 ± 12.6 years; 607, 74% men) underwent 826 OHT procedures (787 patients, 95.3% bicaval anastomosis). Patients who were exposed to amiodarone (odds ratio [OR] 2.30; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.58-3.34; P < .001) and have older donor (OR 1.02; 95% CI 1.01-1.04; P = .001) were more likely to develop need for chronotropic support. In multivariable analysis, recipient age (OR 1.03; 95% CI 1.00-1.06; P = .04) and biatrial anastomosis (OR 6.12; 95% CI 2.48-15.09) were significantly associated with PPM implantation within 6 months of OHT. No association was found between pre-OHT amiodarone use and PPM implantation. No risk factors assessed were associated with PPM implantation 6 months post-OHT. CONCLUSION Surgical technique and donor age were the main risk factors for the need for chronotropic support post-OHT, whereas surgical technique and recipient age were risk factors for early PPM implantation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tuna Ustunkaya
- Cardiac Electrophysiology, Department of Medicine, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Department of Internal Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
| | - Jackson J Liang
- Cardiac Electrophysiology, Department of Medicine, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Cardiac Electrophysiology, Department of Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
| | - Aung N Lin
- Cardiac Electrophysiology, Department of Medicine, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Yasuhiro Shirai
- Cardiac Electrophysiology, Department of Medicine, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Maria Molina
- Cardiac Surgery, Department of Surgery, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Anjali T Owens
- Heart Failure and Transplant, Department of Medicine, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Michael A Acker
- Cardiac Surgery, Department of Surgery, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Christian A Bermudez
- Cardiac Surgery, Department of Surgery, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Pasquale Santangeli
- Cardiac Electrophysiology, Department of Medicine, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Saman Nazarian
- Cardiac Electrophysiology, Department of Medicine, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Sanjay Dixit
- Cardiac Electrophysiology, Department of Medicine, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Francis E Marchlinski
- Cardiac Electrophysiology, Department of Medicine, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - David J Callans
- Cardiac Electrophysiology, Department of Medicine, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
| |
Collapse
|