OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate the impact of new conduction defects after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) on the evolution of left ventricular (LV) function during 1-year follow-up. BACKGROUND: New left bundle branch block (LBBB) or need for permanent pacing due to atrioventricular (AV) block are frequent after TAVI. METHODS: A total of 90 consecutive patients treated with TAVI and who had 12-month echocardiographic follow-up were included in the study. In 39 patients, a new conduction defect (new LBBB or need for permanent pacemaker activity.) persisted 1 month after TAVI. In 51 patients, no persistent new conduction defect was observed. Two-dimensional echocardiography using parasternal short-axis, apical 4-chamber, and apical 2-chamber views was performed before TAVI and at 1-year follow-up to determine LV volumes and ejection fraction based on Simpson's rule. Speckle-tracking echocardiography was applied using standard LV short-axis images to assess the effect of new conduction defects on time-to-peak radial strain of different LV segments as a parameter of LV dyssynchrony. RESULTS: New conduction defects resulted in marked heterogeneity in time-to-peak strain between the 6 analyzed short-axis segments. During 1-year follow-up after TAVI, there was a significant increase in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in patients without new LBBB (53 ± 11% pre TAVI to 59 ± 10% at follow-up; p < 0.001), whereas there was no change in LVEF in patients with a new conduction defect (52 ± 11% pre TAVI to 51 ± 12% at follow-up, p = 0.740). Change in LV end-systolic volume was also significantly different between patient groups (-1.0 ± 14.2 vs. -11.2 ± 15.7 ml, p = 0.042). New conduction defect and LVEF at baseline were independent predictors of reduced LVEF at 12-month follow-up after TAVI. CONCLUSIONS: LVEF improves after TAVI for treatment of severe aortic stenosis in patients without new conduction defects. In patients with a new conduction defect after TAVI, there is no improvement in LVEF at follow-up.
OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate the impact of new conduction defects after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) on the evolution of left ventricular (LV) function during 1-year follow-up. BACKGROUND: New left bundle branch block (LBBB) or need for permanent pacing due to atrioventricular (AV) block are frequent after TAVI. METHODS: A total of 90 consecutive patients treated with TAVI and who had 12-month echocardiographic follow-up were included in the study. In 39 patients, a new conduction defect (new LBBB or need for permanent pacemaker activity.) persisted 1 month after TAVI. In 51 patients, no persistent new conduction defect was observed. Two-dimensional echocardiography using parasternal short-axis, apical 4-chamber, and apical 2-chamber views was performed before TAVI and at 1-year follow-up to determine LV volumes and ejection fraction based on Simpson's rule. Speckle-tracking echocardiography was applied using standard LV short-axis images to assess the effect of new conduction defects on time-to-peak radial strain of different LV segments as a parameter of LV dyssynchrony. RESULTS: New conduction defects resulted in marked heterogeneity in time-to-peak strain between the 6 analyzed short-axis segments. During 1-year follow-up after TAVI, there was a significant increase in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in patients without new LBBB (53 ± 11% pre TAVI to 59 ± 10% at follow-up; p < 0.001), whereas there was no change in LVEF in patients with a new conduction defect (52 ± 11% pre TAVI to 51 ± 12% at follow-up, p = 0.740). Change in LV end-systolic volume was also significantly different between patient groups (-1.0 ± 14.2 vs. -11.2 ± 15.7 ml, p = 0.042). New conduction defect and LVEF at baseline were independent predictors of reduced LVEF at 12-month follow-up after TAVI. CONCLUSIONS: LVEF improves after TAVI for treatment of severe aortic stenosis in patients without new conduction defects. In patients with a new conduction defect after TAVI, there is no improvement in LVEF at follow-up.
Authors: Marcel Weber; Eva Brüggemann; Robert Schueler; Diana Momcilovic; Jan-Malte Sinning; Alexander Ghanem; Nikos Werner; Eberhard Grube; Wolfgang Schiller; Fritz Mellert; Armin Welz; Georg Nickenig; Christoph Hammerstingl Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2015-05-13 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Thomas T Poels; Patrick Houthuizen; Leen A F M Van Garsse; Jos G Maessen; Peter de Jaegere; Frits W Prinzen Journal: J Cardiovasc Transl Res Date: 2014-05-07 Impact factor: 4.132
Authors: Robert M A van der Boon; Patrick Houthuizen; Rutger-Jan Nuis; Nicolas M van Mieghem; Frits Prinzen; Peter P T de Jaegere Journal: Curr Cardiol Rep Date: 2014-01 Impact factor: 2.931
Authors: Thomas T Poels; Robert Stassen; Suzanne Kats; Leo Veenstra; Vincent van Ommen; Bastiaan Kietselaer; Patrick Houthuizen; Jos G Maessen; Frits W Prinzen Journal: Medicina (Kaunas) Date: 2021-05-11 Impact factor: 2.430