Mohamad Lazkani1, Charan Yerasi2, Sheena Prakash3, Ashish Pershad3, Kenith Fang3. 1. University of Colorado Health, Medical Center of the Rockies, Loveland, Colorado. 2. St. Joseph's Medical Center, Phoenix, Arizona. 3. University of Arizona, Banner University Medical Center, Phoenix, Arizona.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation and paravalvular leak (PVL) rates after sutureless aortic valve replacement (SuAVR) vary widely. The aim of this meta-analysis was to examine the incidence of new PPM implantation and PVL after SuAVR. METHODS: Studies evaluating PPM implantation and PVL rates after SuAVR were searched in Medline/PubMed, Ovid Journals, Clinicaltrials.gov, Cochrane central register of controlled trials and database. Studies with a sample size ≥10 were included in this analysis. Pooled proportions were calculated using both the fixed and random-effects models. The heterogeneity among studies was tested using I2 statistic. The study design was written in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. RESULTS: Thirty studies involving 3993 patients with a median follow-up of 12 months were included. The median age was 77 years and males constituted 50%. There was a history of stroke and coronary artery disease in 6% and 31% of the population. Pooled proportions demonstrate a cumulative postoperative PPM rate of 8.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] 7.6-9.5%, I2 = 68.8%) and the overall rate of any PVL was 4.2% (95%CI 3.4-5%, I2 = 76.1%) across all major SuAVR devices. The rate of severe PVL was only 0.4% (95%CI 0.2-0.7%, I2 = 0%) at discharge and 0.5% (95%CI 0.2-0.9%, I2 = 0%) at 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: In SuAVR prostheses implanted in this meta-analysis, the postoperative permanent pacemaker rate was higher (8.5%) than reported for non-SuAVR prosthesis. While the overall PVL rate was 4.2%, the incidence of severe PVL was only 0.4% at discharge and remained stable at 0.5% at 12 months.
BACKGROUND: Permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation and paravalvular leak (PVL) rates after sutureless aortic valve replacement (SuAVR) vary widely. The aim of this meta-analysis was to examine the incidence of new PPM implantation and PVL after SuAVR. METHODS: Studies evaluating PPM implantation and PVL rates after SuAVR were searched in Medline/PubMed, Ovid Journals, Clinicaltrials.gov, Cochrane central register of controlled trials and database. Studies with a sample size ≥10 were included in this analysis. Pooled proportions were calculated using both the fixed and random-effects models. The heterogeneity among studies was tested using I2 statistic. The study design was written in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. RESULTS: Thirty studies involving 3993 patients with a median follow-up of 12 months were included. The median age was 77 years and males constituted 50%. There was a history of stroke and coronary artery disease in 6% and 31% of the population. Pooled proportions demonstrate a cumulative postoperative PPM rate of 8.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] 7.6-9.5%, I2 = 68.8%) and the overall rate of any PVL was 4.2% (95%CI 3.4-5%, I2 = 76.1%) across all major SuAVR devices. The rate of severe PVL was only 0.4% (95%CI 0.2-0.7%, I2 = 0%) at discharge and 0.5% (95%CI 0.2-0.9%, I2 = 0%) at 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: In SuAVR prostheses implanted in this meta-analysis, the postoperative permanent pacemaker rate was higher (8.5%) than reported for non-SuAVR prosthesis. While the overall PVL rate was 4.2%, the incidence of severe PVL was only 0.4% at discharge and remained stable at 0.5% at 12 months.
Authors: Michael L Williams; Campbell D Flynn; Andrew A Mamo; David H Tian; Utz Kappert; Manuel Wilbring; Thierry Folliguet; Antonio Fiore; Antonio Miceli; Augusto D'Onofrio; Giorgia Cibin; Gino Gerosa; Mattia Glauber; Theodor Fischlein; Francesco Pollari Journal: Ann Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2020-07
Authors: Paolo Berretta; Luca Montecchiani; Fabio Vagnarelli; Mariano Cefarelli; Jacopo Alfonsi; Carlo Zingaro; Filippo Capestro; Michele D Pierri; Alessandro D'alfonso; Marco Di Eusanio Journal: Ann Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2020-09