BACKGROUND: The objective of this retrospective study was to evaluate the tolerance of rapid right ventricular pacing (RRVP) compared with that of the traditional methods of hypotension used during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). METHODS: From January 2002 to December 2012, we retrospectively included all the patients treated with TEVAR by comparing the 2 groups: patients operated with RRVP (RRVP+) and those operated without RRVP (RRVP-). The characteristics of the population and the procedures were recorded. The rates of complications were compared up to 1 year. RESULTS: Sixty-one patients were operated. Treated pathologies were multiple with 19 aneurysms, 14 false aneurysms, 12 isthmic ruptures, 11 dissections, 3 coarctations, and 2 endoleaks. Twenty-four patients were RRVP+ and 37 patients were RRVP-. Mortality rates at 1 month in groups RRVP+ and RRVP- were of 0% and 2.7%, respectively (P = 1), and reintervention rates were 0% and 13.5%, respectively (P = 0.15). Three peroperative rhythm disorders (12.5%) were observed in the RRVP+ group including 2 ventricular fibrillations and 1 atrial fibrillation, both reduced without complications. One pacemaker was implanted for atrioventricular block in the RRVP- group. In the RRVP+ group, 83.3% of the patients presented a rise in troponin Ic (TnI) >0.04 ng/mL in 72 hours compared with 40.5% of the patients in the RRVP- group (P = 0.0013), with a spontaneously favorable evolution. No coronary syndrome was observed at 1 year with a mortality rate of 10.8% in the RRVP- group vs. 0% in the RRVP+ (P = 0.15). CONCLUSIONS: In spite of a frequent moderate rise of TnI at the time of RRVP, this technique does not present more complications at 1 year than the use of a chemical hypotension. It thus seems an interesting alternative for selected patients, in trained teams.
BACKGROUND: The objective of this retrospective study was to evaluate the tolerance of rapid right ventricular pacing (RRVP) compared with that of the traditional methods of hypotension used during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). METHODS: From January 2002 to December 2012, we retrospectively included all the patients treated with TEVAR by comparing the 2 groups: patients operated with RRVP (RRVP+) and those operated without RRVP (RRVP-). The characteristics of the population and the procedures were recorded. The rates of complications were compared up to 1 year. RESULTS: Sixty-one patients were operated. Treated pathologies were multiple with 19 aneurysms, 14 false aneurysms, 12 isthmic ruptures, 11 dissections, 3 coarctations, and 2 endoleaks. Twenty-four patients were RRVP+ and 37 patients were RRVP-. Mortality rates at 1 month in groups RRVP+ and RRVP- were of 0% and 2.7%, respectively (P = 1), and reintervention rates were 0% and 13.5%, respectively (P = 0.15). Three peroperative rhythm disorders (12.5%) were observed in the RRVP+ group including 2 ventricular fibrillations and 1 atrial fibrillation, both reduced without complications. One pacemaker was implanted for atrioventricular block in the RRVP- group. In the RRVP+ group, 83.3% of the patients presented a rise in troponin Ic (TnI) >0.04 ng/mL in 72 hours compared with 40.5% of the patients in the RRVP- group (P = 0.0013), with a spontaneously favorable evolution. No coronary syndrome was observed at 1 year with a mortality rate of 10.8% in the RRVP- group vs. 0% in the RRVP+ (P = 0.15). CONCLUSIONS: In spite of a frequent moderate rise of TnI at the time of RRVP, this technique does not present more complications at 1 year than the use of a chemical hypotension. It thus seems an interesting alternative for selected patients, in trained teams.