Literature DB >> 36003550

One-year pacing dependency after pacemaker implantation in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Justine M Ravaux1, Michele Di Mauro1, Kevin Vernooy2,3,4, Arnoud W Van't Hof2,3, Leo Veenstra2, Suzanne Kats1, Jos G Maessen1,3, Roberto Lorusso1,3.   

Abstract

Objectives: Atrioventricular conductions disturbances, requiring permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI), represent a potential complication after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), However, little is known about the pacemaker dependency after PPI in this patient setting. This systematic review analyses the incidence of PPI, the short-term (1-year) pacing dependency, and predictors for such a state after TAVI.
Methods: We performed a systematic search in PUBMED, EMBASE, and MEDLINE to identify potentially relevant literature investigating PPI requirement and dependency after TAVI. Study data, patients, and procedural characteristics were extracted. Odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals were extracted.
Results: Data from 23 studies were obtained that included 18,610 patients. The crude incidence of PPI after TAVI was 17% (range, 8.8%-32%). PPI occurred at a median time of 3.2 days (range, 0-30 days). Pacing dependency at 1-year was 47.5% (range, 7%-89%). Self-expandable prosthesis (pooled OR was 2.14 [1.15-3.96]) and baseline right bundle branch block (pooled OR was 2.01 [1.06-3.83]) showed 2-fold greater risk to maintain PPI dependency at 1 year after TAVI. Conclusions: Although PPI represents a rather frequent event after TAVI, conduction disorders have a temporary nature in almost 50% of the cases with recovery and stabilization after discharge. Preoperative conduction abnormality and type of TAVI are associated with higher PPI dependency at short term.
© 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of The American Association for Thoracic Surgery.

Entities:  

Keywords:  AF, atrial fibrillation; BE, balloon-expandable; CI, confidence interval; OR, odds ratio; PPI, permanent pacemaker implantation; RBBB, right bundle branch block; SE, self-expandable; STS, Society of Thoracic Surgeons; TAVI, transcatheter aortic valve implantation; conduction disturbances; pacemaker dependency; permanent pacemaker; transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Year:  2021        PMID: 36003550      PMCID: PMC9390410          DOI: 10.1016/j.xjon.2021.02.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JTCVS Open        ISSN: 2666-2736


Rate of pacemaker dependency across the time after TAVI. Up to 50% of the patients with permanent pacemaker implantation following TAVI exhibit no pacemaker dependency at 1-year follow-up. Better understanding of pacemaker dependency after TAVI should allow better oriented guidelines with respect to indications and timing of pacemaker implantation, as well as postpermanent pacemaker implantation management, based on the high recovery rate of effective native atrio/ventricular conduction. See Commentaries on pages 56 and 58. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) was first introduced in 2002 as a less-invasive therapeutic option in patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis unfit for cardiac surgery. Nowadays, there is a trend to extend these procedures even to intermediate- and low-risk patients, making the frequency of TAVI procedures grow exponentially. However, complications, such as atrioventricular conduction disturbances requiring permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI), may diminish the benefit of these procedures: the incidence of PPI after TAVI, for instance, represents a rather frequent event after TAVI. Indeed, an association between PPI and all-cause deaths and heart failure rehospitalizations at 1 year from TAVI has been recently shown. However, a certain percentage of atrioventricular conduction abnormalities after TAVI may resolve following PPI, even after a few days from implant. Presently, the current literature available on pacing dependency after TAVI is limited and based on studies with small patient samples (evidence level B)., Therefore, we performed this systematic review to determine the incidence of PPI, the pacing dependency, and potential predictors for pacing-dependency at 1 year after TAVI procedures.

Methods

Research Strategy

A broad, computerized literature search was performed to identify all relevant studies from PubMed, Embase, and MEDLINE databases. The PubMed database was searched entering the following key words: "Pacemaker, Artificial"[Mesh] OR pacemaker implantation AND "Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement"[Mesh] OR transcatheter aortic valve implantation. We restricted the research to English-language publications. Last access to the database was on April 25, 2020. The search was limited to studies in human recipients. A framework of the systematic review process is plotted in Figure 1, in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Because this study was a systematic review and meta-analysis based on published articles, ethical approval was waived by the institutional review board of the University Hospital of Maastricht.
Figure 1

Study selection. Flow diagram of included studies based on the Preferred Reported Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA).

Study selection. Flow diagram of included studies based on the Preferred Reported Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA).

Eligibility Criteria and Study Selection

Studies were included in the final analyses if patients were (1) >18 years; (2) >250 patients were included in the main analysis, to provide data interpretation of the most consistent clinical series; and (3) studies provided a definition of cardiac pacemaker dependency. Other studies following the same criteria, but having a smaller patient sample size (<250 patients), were included in a separated analysis (secondary analysis) and are provided in Appendix E1. Multiple publications from a single center were managed to include the last publication. If the same authors published more studies with the same series, the largest patient cohort was included. Studies were excluded if 1 of the following criteria was present: (1) presence of congenital pathology; (2) patients undergoing noncardiac surgery procedures or transcatheter procedure or heart transplantation; (3) no information provided about PPI; (4), publication before year 2002; or (5) outcomes not clearly reported or impossible to extract or calculate from the available results. Review, clinical update, and case reports were not taken into account. All potentially relevant studies were reviewed in detail to check their adhesion to the inclusion criteria. Title and abstracts of all retrieved paper were independently reviewed by 2 researchers (J.R. and M.D.M.) to identify studies fulfilling the inclusion criteria. Controversial findings were solved by the intervention of a third reviewer (R.L.). The quality of included studies was assessed using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale for observational studies by 2 investigators independently (J.R. and M.D.M.).

Data Extraction

Microsoft Office Excel 2016 (Microsoft, Redmond, Wash) was used for data extraction that was performed independently by 2 researchers (K.V., L.V.). Year of publication, study design, sample size, age, Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score, inclusion period, left ventricular ejection fraction, peripheral vascular disease, diabetes mellitus, valve type, follow-up, approach for TAVI, indications for PPI, timing of PPI (days), PPI rate, dependency definition, dependency follow-up (months), multivariable predictors of PPI, and PPI-related complications were extracted.

Statistical Analysis

The primary end point was 1-year pacing dependency, defined in different ways. Calculation of proportions of PM dependency at different time points was obtained using a meta-analytic approach by means of metaprop function of meta package in R (Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria). Odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were extracted. We calculated the I2 statistics (0% ∼ 100%) to explain the between-study heterogeneity, with I2 ≤ 25% suggesting more homogeneity, 25% < I2 ≤ 75% suggesting moderate heterogeneity, and I2 > 75% suggesting high heterogeneity. If the null hypothesis was rejected, a random effects model was used to calculate pooled effect estimates. If the null hypothesis was not rejected, a fixed-effects model was used to calculate pooled effect estimates; 95% CI was also reported. Forest plots were used to plot the effect size, either for each study or overall. Publication bias was evaluated by graphical inspection of funnel plot; estimation of publication bias was performed with trim-and-fill method and quantified by means of Egger's linear regression test. On-leave out study analysis was performed as sensitivity analysis in case of moderate or high heterogeneity. Meta-regression was performed to test the influence of age, time of pacemaker implantation, and sample size. The software used for the analyses was R-studio (meta package), version 1.1.463 (2009-2018).

Results

Study Selection

A total of 877 records were initially screened at the title and abstract level, with 801 papers fully reviewed for eligibility. There were no duplicate data. Ultimately, 23 studies were identified and provided data for the research analysis.9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 An additional 30 studies are considered in Appendix E1 because of their limited sample size (<250 patients). The flowsheet for selection of included studies is represented in Figure 1. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale confirmed a high-quality level for all studies included in the main analysis (Table E1).
Table E1

Newcastle–Ottawa Scale for the assessment of the risk of bias in individual nonrandomized studies

AuthorScoreSelectionComparabilityOutcome/exposure
Bjerre Thygesen et al98∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗
Urena et al109∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗
Nazif et al119∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗
Van Gils et al129∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗
Raelson et al138∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗
Dumonteil et al149∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗
Kaplan et al159∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗
Chamandi et al168∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗
Gaede et al178∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗
Gonska et al187∗∗∗∗∗∗
Marzahn et al199∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗
Nadeem et al209∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗
Campelo-Parada et al218∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗
Mirolo et al228∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗
Van Gils et al238∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗
Takahashi et al248∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗
Chan et al259∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗
Ghannam et al269∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗
Costa et al279∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗
Dolci et al289∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗
Tovia-Brodie et al299∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗
Junquera et al309∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗
Meduri et al319∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗

Study, Participants, and Procedural Characteristics

Baseline characteristics of selected studies are represented in Table 1. Studies were published between 2014 and 2019, and patient recruitment occurred between January 2005 and February 2018; 26% of them (n = 6) were prospective,,,,,, and the remaining studies were all retrospective observational. Mean duration of follow-up was 16 months.
Table 1

Baseline characteristics of studies including >250 patients (n = 23)

StudyYearStudy design (no. centers)Sample sizeAge, ySTS score, %Inclusion periodLeft ventricle ejection fraction, %Peripheral vascular disease, %Diabetes mellitus, %Valve typeFollow-up, moApproach for TAVIMortality at 30 d
Bjerre Thygesen et al92014Prospective (1)258nananananana100% SEnanana
Urena et al102014Retrospective (8)155680.57.5January 2005 to February 201355.5na31.155.1% BE44.9% SE22na7%
Nazif et al112015Retrospective (21)197384.511.4May 2007 to September 201153.742.436100% BE12na6.6%
Van Gils et al122017Retrospective (4)306836.3May 2008 to February 2016na223038.2% SE34.7% SE27.1% ME12na7%
Raelson et al132017Retrospective (1)57885.5naMarch 2009 to December 2014nanana21% SE79% BE1nana
Dumonteil et al142017Retrospective (14)250846.3October 2012 to May 201458.3na22.5100% ME12100% Transfemoral4%
Kaplan et al152019Retrospective (1)59481.6naJanuary 2011 to December 2017nananana12nana
Chamandi et al162018Prospective (9)169281.510.9May 2009 to February 2015nana33.150.3% BE49.7% SE48na42.3%
Gaede et al172018Retrospective (1)102581.9na2010-2015na21.133.3na2.4nana
Gonska et al182018Prospective (1)61280.46.5February 2014 to September 201657.5na29.958.8% BE36.7% ME4.4% SE12na1.3%
Marzahn et al192018Retrospective (1)85680.5naJuly 2008 to May 201557.5na3837.4% SE57.8% BE4.8% ME12100% Transfemoralna
Nadeem et al202018Retrospective (1)67281.47.42011-201753.821.541na12nana
Campelo-Parada et al212018Retrospective (2)347nanaMay 2010 to December 201554.6na37.3100% BE177.8% Transfemoralna
Mirolo et al222018Retrospective (1)936nanaOctober 2009 to January 2017nanana95% BE5% SE2.3nana
Van Gils et al232018Retrospective (1)29179naJanuary 2012 to December 2015nana3442% SE51.5% BE6.5% ME1294% transfemoral6% transsubclavian5%
Takahashi et al242018Retrospective (4)162184.3naJanuary 2010 to December 2014nanana72.5% SE13nana
Chan et al252018Retrospective (2)91381.6naJanuary 2012 to December 2017nananana12nana
Ghannam et al262019Retrospective (1)57379.86.4January 2012 to September 201757.245.837.8100% SE17.1nana
Costa et al272019Prospective (1)1116824.4June 2007 to February 201853.3na28.961.8% SE27.2% BE0.5% ME10.5% Others7297% transfemoral3% others3.9%
Dolci et al282019Retrospective (1)26680naFebruary 2014 to February 2018532228100% BE1284% transfemoral16% transapicalna
Tovia-Brodie et al292019Prospective (1)79582.5naApril 2012 to December 2016nananana28.2nana
Junquera et al302019Retrospective (2)676825May 2007 to March 201757.4na31.260.5% BE35.2% SE0.7% ME0.3% others1264.8% transfemoralna
Meduri et al312019Prospective (1)70482.56.6nana28.230.934% SE66% ME12nana
Totalna7918,61081.8 (43-102)7.1 (0.74-34)January 2005 to February 201855.62932.6SE 38%BE 46%ME 13.5%others 2.5%1688.2% transfemoral2.3% transapical0.9% transsubclavianOthers 8.7%9.6%

Values are n (%). STS score, Society of Thoracic Surgeons Risk Score; TAVI, transaortic valve implantation; na, not available; SE, self-expandable; BE, balloon-expandable; ME, mechanically expandable.

Follow-up is reported as mean or median as given by the authors.

Baseline characteristics of studies including >250 patients (n = 23) Values are n (%). STS score, Society of Thoracic Surgeons Risk Score; TAVI, transaortic valve implantation; na, not available; SE, self-expandable; BE, balloon-expandable; ME, mechanically expandable. Follow-up is reported as mean or median as given by the authors. In total, 18,610 patients were included in 23 studies from 79 centers. The crude incidence of PPI after TAVI procedure was 17%, ranging from 8.8% to 32%. Preprocedural risk was assessed by the STS score in the majority of the studies (11/23) and the mean STS score was 7.1 (0.74-34). Mean age was 81.8 years (range, 43-102 years). The implanted device was a self-expandable (SE) valve in 38% of patients, a mechanically expandable valve in 13.5%, and a balloon-expandable (BE) in 46% of the patient population. Others devices were used in 2.5% of the patients. Three studies used only BE valves,,, and 3 studies implanted solely SE valve.,, The transfemoral access route was preferred (88.2%) over the other approaches (transapical 2.3%; transsubclavian 0.9%, and other approach used in 8.7%). The mortality at 30 days was 9.6%. The baseline characteristics of the studies including <250 patients are provided in Table E2.
Table E2

Baseline characteristics of studies including <250 patients (n = 30)

StudyYearStudy design (no. centers)Sample sizeAge, ySTS score, %Inclusion periodLeft ventricle ejection fraction, %Peripheral artery disease, %Diabetes mellitus, %Valve typeFollow-up, moApproach for TAVIMortality at 30 d
Sinhal et alE12008Prospective (1)10684.2nana62.5nana100% SAPIEN1nana
Jilaihawi et alE22009Retrospective (1)3084.48.3January 2007 to March 200847.5na17.6100% MCVnana8.8%
Baan et alE32010Retrospective (1)3480.45nanana32100% MCV1na20.5%
Fraccaro et alE42011Retrospective (1)6481naMay 2007 to April 200952.334.4na100% MCV1294% transfemoral6% transsubclavian5%
Van der boon et alE52013Prospective (1)16781naNovember 2005 to February 20115110.221.6100% MCV11,597% transfemoral3% transsubclavianna
Pereira et alE62013Retrospective (1)6579.3naAugust 2007 to May 2011na47.738.5100% MCV678.5% transfemoral20% transsubclavian1.5% direct aorticna
Goldenberg et alE72013Retrospective (1)191nanaFebruary 2009 to July 2012nanana65% MCV35% SAPIEN17nana
Ramazzina et alE82014Retrospective (1)9783naOctober 2010 to January 201355na26.461% MCV39% SAPIEN12100% transfemoralna
Boerlage-Van Dijk et alE92014Retrospective (1)12180.54.5October 2007 to June 2011nana28100% MCV12100% Transfemoralna
Renilla et alE102015Retrospective (1)95nanaJanuary 2007 to December 2011nanana100% MCV3586.9% transfemoral13% transsubclavianna
Petronio et alE112015Prospective (9)19480.27.2October 2011 to April 2013na27.631100% MCV189.7% transfemoral6.2% transsubclavian4.1% direct aortic1.6%
Weber et alE122015Retrospective (1)21280.89.42008 - 201252.8na25100% MCV9100% transfemoral6.1%
Schernthaner et alE132016Retrospective (1)153816nanana3182% MCV18% SAPIEN1,594% transfemoral6% direct aorticna
Kostopoulou et alE142016Prospective (1)4581naJanuary 2010 to February 201249na27100% MCV24nana
Sideris et alE152016Prospective (1)168nanaJanuary 2009 to October 2015nanana100% MCVna100% transfemoralna
Luke et alE162016Retrospective (1)14081naJuly 2011 to May 2016nanana81% MCV19% EVOLUTna100% transfemoralna
Makki et alE172017Retrospective (1)17283naNovember 2011 to January 201651na4692% MCV8% LOTUS22100% transfemoralna
Nijenhuis et alE182017Retrospective (1)15580.56June 2007 to June 20155930.334.8na24nana
Naveh et alE192017Prospective (1)11080.7naSeptember 2008 to November 201357.623.63075.5% MCV24.5% SAPIEN1288.2% transfemoral6.4% transsubclavian5.5% direct aorticna
Alasti et alE202018Prospective (1)15283.6naApril 2012 to October 201659.25.318.7100% LOTUS1299.4% transfemoral0.6% direct aortic2.6%
Ortak et alE212018Prospective (1)6680.43.72014 -201653.2nana100% LOTUS7na3.5%
Rodes-Cabau et alE222018Prospective(11)103805June 2014 to July 201656na4314.5% MCV37% EVOLUT R51.5% SAPIEN1286% transfemoral10% transapical4% transsubclavianna
Leong et alE232018Retrospective (1)6780.5naJanuary 2013 to December 2015nana3016.4% EVOLUT R35.8% MCV34.3% SAPIEN13.4% Others2,4nana
Sharma et alE242018Prospective (1)22681.2naMarch 2012 to October 2016nanana100% BE1nana
Bacik et alE252018Prospective (1)11677.1naAugust 2013 to Mar 201750.5na40.5100% SAPIEN1282.8% transfemoral17.2% transapicalna
Megaly et alE262019Prospective (1)172nanaJanuary 2010 to May 2017nana50na12nana
Yazdchi et alE272019Retrospective (1)nanana2013 - 2017nananana14nana
McCaffrey et alE282019Retrospective (1)9879.65May 2015 to March 201855.72635100% SAPIEN193% transfemoral6% transapical1% direct aortic4.8%
Miura et alE292019Retrospective (1)20184.86.4October 2013 to September 201660.6926100% SAPIEN13.568% transfemorall 27% transapical5% transiliac0.5%
Dhakal et alE302020Retrospective (1)176805.7Seprember 2012 to March 2017533143na18.9nana
Totalna49 centers361281.26November 2005 to March 201854.424.532.165.6% MCV23.1% SAPIEN8% LOTUS2.7% EVOLUT0.5% Others11.492.5% transfemoral3% transsubclavian1% direct aortic3.2% transapical0.3% transiliac6%

Values are n (%). STS score, Society of Thoracic Surgeons Risk Score; TAVI, transaortic valve implantation; na, not available; MCV, Medtronic CoreValve.

Follow-up is reported as mean or median as given by the authors.

PPI Details

The PPI details in studies including >250 patients are reported in Table 2. Data regarding PPI details in studies including <250 patients are described in Table E3. All studies provided indications for PPI, except in 4 series.,,, The main indications for PPI were divided into 3 main categories of atrioventricular conduction disorders: atrioventricular block (second and third degree) in 82.7% of the patients, sick sinus syndrome in 2.7%, severe bradycardia in 2.8%, and others indications in 11.8% of the patients, respectively. The timing of PPI varied remarkably among studies, occurring at a median time of 3.2 days (range, 0-30 days) from TAVI procedure. Nine studies didn't provide information about the timing of PPI.,18, 19, 20, 21,,,, The overall incidence of PPI reached 17% of the TAVI patients, ranging from 8.8% to 32% of the cases.
Table 2

Pacemaker-related details in studies including >250 patients (n = 23)

StudyIndications for PPITiming of PPI, dPPI rateDependency definitionDependency rateDependency follow-up, moMultivariable predictors of PPIAssociationPPI-related complications
Bjerre Thygesen et al9100% AVBna27.4%Resolution of conduction abnormalities50%nananana
Urena et al1075.3% AVB7.1% SSS7.9% bradycardia9.6% others315.4%“paced rhythm” reported66.9%12na

PPI protective factor for the occurrence of unexpected (sudden or unknown) death

Negative effect on left ventricular function over time

na
Nazif et al1179% AVB17.3% SSS38.8%“ventricular pacing” reported50.5%12

Pre-existing RBBB

Prosthesis to left ventricle outflow tract diameter ratio

Left ventricle -end diastolic diameter

Longer duration of hospitalization

Greater rates of repeat hospitalization and mortality or repeat hospitalization at 1 y

na
Van Gils et al1299% AVB1% SSS241%% ventricular pacing rhythm reported89%12

LOTUS valve

Greater BMI before TAVI

RBBB at baseline associated with greater PPI

na
Raelson et al1382% AVB39%No intrinsic ventricular activity during pacing at 30 bpm39%1nanana
Dumonteil et al1488.9% AVB5.9% others332%“paced rhythm” reported55.4%12

Baseline RBBB

Left ventricle outflow tract overstretch >10%

Trend lower PPI rate at 30 d with shallower (≤5 mm) implant depth

na
Kaplan et al1579% AVB21% others2,513.1%High-grade AVB with a ventricular escape rate of less than 40 beats/min on device interrogation21.9%12na

Use of SE valves and postballoon dilatation associated with markedly increased risk of PPM dependency

na
Chamandi et al1676.7% AVB5.6% SSS3.1% Bradycardia14.6% others219.8%100% right ventricular pacing27.4%48na

PPI greater rates of rehospitalization due to heart failure and combined end point of mortality or heart failure rehospitalization

PPI lesser improvement in left ventricle ejection fraction over time, particularly if reduced before TAVI

na
Gaede et al1790% AVB8% SSS2% Bradycardia414.7%Ventricular pacing >95%29.5%2.4

Pre-existing RBBB

CoreValve prosthesis

Predictors of lack of recovery of AVB

Previous RBBB

Greater mean aortic valve gradient

Postdilatation of the prosthesis

na
Gonska et al1885.% AVB10.1% Bradycardia4.8% othersna24.4%“ventricular pacing” reported30.9%1na

PPI without significant impact on survival or combined end point of major adverse events within 1 y

1.8% reoperation due to lead dislocation2.4% hematomas/bleeding at the site of the pacemaker
Marzahn et al1989% AVB5.5% Bradycardia4.1% SSS1.4% othersna16.9%“right ventricular pacing %” reported55%12nanana
Nadeem et al20nana21.7%“right ventricular pacing %” reported45.5%12na

PPI more likely to have heart failure admissions

PPI trend toward increased mortality

na
Campelo-Parada et al2184.3% AVB9.3% BradycardiaOthers 6.2%na9.2%Ventricular pacing >1% at 1 mo = AVB resolution67.2%1na

BAV associated with increased risk of conduction abnormalities persistence

na
Mirolo et al2268.8% AVB30% others2,59.3%Ventricular pacing ≥ 1% = significant75%2.9nana1.25% endocarditis lead leading to pacemaker explanation2.5% partial left pneumothorax secondary to subclavian vein puncture1.25% ventricular lead deplacement
Van Gils et al2396% AVB5% SSS59.3%Less than 20% ventricular pacing over 6 mo' follow-up25%6nanana
Takahashi et al24nana16.4%Absence, inadequate intrinsic ventricular rhythm, or ventricular pacing >95% in pacemaker interrogation during follow-up (PPM on VVI 30/min)52.8%13na

DDD mode and SE valves use associated with pacemaker dependency

na
Chan et al25nana13.1%Ventricular pacing reported59%12nana1.6% atrial lead dislodgement6% ventricular lead dislodgement
Ghannam et al26100% AVB2,414%No recovery of AV nodal conduction if CHB, high-grade AVB, or native ventricular rate <50 beats/min in absence of normal AV conduction50%12na

Larger aortic annulus less likely to recover conduction

1.2% (1 patient with right ventricular lead fracture)
Costa et al2784.8% AVB4.1%SSS11% Othersna13%Absence of an escape or intrinsic rhythm for 30 s during temporary back-up pacing at a rate of 30 bpm33.3%12na

PPI associated with increased 6 y mortality

Baseline RBBB greater chance of being dependent at follow-up

na
Dolci et al2880%AVB11% Bradycardia9% others413%“paced rhythm” reported7%12

Baseline RBBB

QRS width immediately after TAVI

nana
Tovia-Brodie et al2992% AVB8% othersna8.8%No need for ventricular pacing defined as <1% ventricular pacing and intrinsic 1:1 AV conduction with the device programmed to VVI 30 beats per minute39%28,2

Baseline long PR interval

Use of newer generation valves

na3.7% tamponade
Junquera et al30na612.7%AVB/CHB recovery = ventricular pacing rate <1%33.4%12nanana
Meduri et al3190% AVB6% Bradycardia4% others228.4%Patients who were symptomatic or did not have a native rhythm+capture of the percentage of paced ventricular beats50%12

Baseline RBBB

Mean depth of valve implantation

Medically treated diabetes mellitus in LOTUS valve patients

na
Total82.7% AVB2.7% SSS2.8% bradycardia11.8% Others3.217%nana11.8nanana

Values are n (%). PPI, Pacemaker implantation; AVB, atrioventricular block, na, not available; SSS, sick sinus syndrome; RBBB, right bundle branch block; BMI, body mass index; TAVI, transcatheter aortic valve implantation; SE, self-expandable; BAV, bicuspid aortic valve; PPM, permanent pacemaker; VVI, single-chamber device; DDD, dual-chamber device; AV, atrioventricular; CHB, complete heart block.

Follow-up is reported as mean or median as given by the authors.

Table E3

Pacemaker details in studies including < 250 patients (n = 30)

StudyIndications PPITiming of PPI, dPPI rateDependency definitionDependency rateDependency follow-up, monthsMultivariable Predictors PPIAssociationPPI-related complications
Sinhal et alE1na25.6%na86%6nanana
Jilaihawi et alE290% AVB10% SSSna33.3%Description by case of the % ventricular pacing at follow-up66.6%1

LBBB with left axis deviation

Diastolic interventricular septa dimension >17 mm

Noncoronary cuspid thickness >8 mm

nana
Baan et alE3100% AVB326.9%“ventricular pacing” reported100%1na

Smaller left ventricle outflow tract diameter

More left-sided heart axis

More mitral annular calcification

Smaller postimplantation indexed effective orifice area

na
Fraccaro et alE496% AVB4% SSSna39%With pacemaker to VVI at the lowest rate possible: continuous pacing or complete AVB or AF with inadequate ventricular response23.5%12

Depth of the prosthesis implantation

Pre-existing RBBB

nana
Van der boon et alE583.3% AVB13.8% bradycardia2.7% others821.6%By temporarily turning off the PPM or programming to a VVI modus at 30 bpm to assess dependency → if high-degree AVB (second degree Mobitz II or third degree) or a slow (<30 bpm) or absent ventricular escape rhythm observed44.4%11.5nanana
Pereira et alE6100% AVB333%Absence of any intrinsic or escape rhythm during back-up pacing at 30 beats/min (VVI)27%12na

Porcelain aorta = independent predictors of pacing dependency at follow-up

na
Goldenberg et alE761.5% AVB3% SSS34% othersna16.8%High degree of AVB (second degree or complete) or intrinsic rhythm <30 beats/min during pacemaker inhibition29%12nanana
Ramazzina et alE846% AVB55% othersna36.1%>99% ventricular pacing29%12

Use of MCV

Diabetes

Atrial fibrillation before TAVI

Associated with no need for PPI

na
Boerlage-Van Dijk et alE991.3% AVB319%Ventricular-paced rhythm (no other definition)52%11.3

Mitral annular calcification

Pre-existing RBBB

No factors found

4.3% atrial lead repositioning4.3% pocket hematoma4.3% cerebral vascular accident
Renilla et alE10100% AVB237.9%Presence of a high-degree AVB (Mobitz II and III) or a slow <30 bpm or absent ventricular escape rhythm (pacemaker turned off or programmed to VVI modus at 30 bpm)39.1%35nana3% pacemaker pocket infection
Petronio et alE11nana24.4%VVI programming 30 beats/min40.7%1

Implantation depth

Implantation depth <4 mm

na
Weber et alE1290% AVB2% bradycardy2% SSS5% othersna23%Pacemaker is partially or frequently needed to ensure heartbeat35%9nanana
Schernthaner et alE1378% AVB7% SSS13% Others720%Absence of an escape or intrinsic rhythm for 30 s during temporary back-up pacing at a rate of 30 bpm37%1.5nanana
Kostopoulou et alE14100% AVBna22%Asystole or CHB with or without escape rhythm after cessation of pacing9%12

Prolonged HV interval prognostic for PPI

Trend between Δ QRS and PPI at 6-mo analysis

na
Sideris et alE15100% AVBna38.7%High ventricular pacing rate >99%100%6nana1.5% pneumothorax
Luke et alE16100% AVBna39.3%“Pacing"0.7%3

Previous conduction system disease

History of atrial fibrillation

Trends with

history of atrial fibrillation

presence of RBBB

male sex

atrioventricular nodal blocking drugs

na
Makki et alE1763% AVB4% bradycardia33% others314%Underlying ventricular asystole >5 s, CHB, >50% pacing, symptoms in the setting of bradycardia (rate <50 bpm)33%3nanana
Nijenhuis et alE1887% AVB824%Ventricular pacing reported68%27

Previous atrial fibrillation

Use of digoxin

MCV implantation

Left heart axis

nana
Naveh et alE19100% AVBna34.5%Absent or inadequate intrinsic ventricular rhythm on pacemaker interrogation (intrinsic rhythm <30 bpm); >5% VP from the last follow-up on pacemaker interrogation; any evidence of VP on pacemaker interrogation in case where the programmed AV interval was >300 ms68.4%12

Baseline RBBB

PR interval (each increment of 10 milliseconds in PR interval, risk for PPI 17% greater)

na0%
Alasti et alE2089.2% AVB2.6% SSS7.8% Others325%The need for ventricular pacing when the pacing rate was lowered to 40 bpm for 10 s → dependent: slow (<40 bpm) or absent ventricular escape rhythm or AVB (Mobitz II or III)38%12nana16% hematomas
Ortak et alE2183% AVB16% othersna22%na64%1

Implantation depth

LOTUS implantation depth >4.8 mm = cut-off to predict PPI

nana
Rodes-Cabau et alE2281% AVB9% bradycardia9% others4211%na78%12nanana
Leong et alE2374.6% AVB20.8% bradycardia13.5% others2.344.8%Ventricular pacing reported73%2.4na

Male sex

Increase in QRS duration post-TAVI

Associated with PPI

0%
Sharma et alE24nana11.1%Spontaneous response ventricular rate less than 30 bpm during backup pacing set at 30 beats/min for 30 s32%1na

RBBB

Intra-procedural CHB

Bifascicular block

QRS duration >120 ms

All associated with pacing dependence at 30 d

na
Bacik et alE2549.8% AVB6.3% SSS43.9% others5.513.8%More than 95% pacing events12%12

Weight

Absence of AF

Aortic peak gradient

Aortic valve area

Severity of pulmonary hypertension

nana
Megaly et alE2650.6% AVB34.9% othersna35%CHB requiring ventricular pacing3.5%12nanana
Yazdchi et alE2778% AVB28.7%Ventricular pacing reported87%14nanana
McCaffrey et alE28nana11.2%Ventricular pacing reported75%1na

Predictive factors of acute conduction abnormalities (4)

Predictive factors of new conductions abnormalities after discharge (5)

na
Miura et alE2990% AVB10% SSS65%Ventricular pacing reported40%12nanana
Dhakal et alE3080% AVB17% SSS3% others217%Ventricular pacing rate54%2.7RBBBIn univariate analysis:

Valve size

SE valve

RBBB

Prolonged PR interval

na
Total72% AVB1.7% SSS3% bradycardia23.2% others6,523.8%nana9nanana

Values are n (%). PPI, Pacemaker implantation; na, not available; AVB, atrioventricular block; SSS, sick sinus syndrome; LBBB, left bundle branch block; VVI, single-chamber device; AF, atrial fibrillation; RBBB, right bundle branch block; PPM, permanent pacemaker; MCV, Medtronic CoreValve; TAVI, transcatheter aortic valve implantation; CHB, complete heart block; SE, self-expandable.

Follow-up is reported as mean or median as given by the authors.

Pacemaker-related details in studies including >250 patients (n = 23) PPI protective factor for the occurrence of unexpected (sudden or unknown) death Negative effect on left ventricular function over time Pre-existing RBBB Prosthesis to left ventricle outflow tract diameter ratio Left ventricle -end diastolic diameter Longer duration of hospitalization Greater rates of repeat hospitalization and mortality or repeat hospitalization at 1 y LOTUS valve Greater BMI before TAVI RBBB at baseline associated with greater PPI Baseline RBBB Left ventricle outflow tract overstretch >10% Trend lower PPI rate at 30 d with shallower (≤5 mm) implant depth Use of SE valves and postballoon dilatation associated with markedly increased risk of PPM dependency PPI greater rates of rehospitalization due to heart failure and combined end point of mortality or heart failure rehospitalization PPI lesser improvement in left ventricle ejection fraction over time, particularly if reduced before TAVI Pre-existing RBBB CoreValve prosthesis Previous RBBB Greater mean aortic valve gradient Postdilatation of the prosthesis PPI without significant impact on survival or combined end point of major adverse events within 1 y PPI more likely to have heart failure admissions PPI trend toward increased mortality BAV associated with increased risk of conduction abnormalities persistence DDD mode and SE valves use associated with pacemaker dependency Larger aortic annulus less likely to recover conduction PPI associated with increased 6 y mortality Baseline RBBB greater chance of being dependent at follow-up Baseline RBBB QRS width immediately after TAVI Baseline long PR interval Use of newer generation valves Baseline RBBB Mean depth of valve implantation Medically treated diabetes mellitus in LOTUS valve patients Values are n (%). PPI, Pacemaker implantation; AVB, atrioventricular block, na, not available; SSS, sick sinus syndrome; RBBB, right bundle branch block; BMI, body mass index; TAVI, transcatheter aortic valve implantation; SE, self-expandable; BAV, bicuspid aortic valve; PPM, permanent pacemaker; VVI, single-chamber device; DDD, dual-chamber device; AV, atrioventricular; CHB, complete heart block. Follow-up is reported as mean or median as given by the authors.

Pacemaker Dependency

There was a large heterogeneity in the assessment and definition of the pacemaker dependency at follow-up. Indeed, 43% of the studies (10/23)10, 11, 12,,,18, 19, 20,, reported a right ventricular pacing rhythm as indicator of the pacemaker dependency at follow-up, whereas the remaining studies provided a wide range of pacemaker dependency definitions and evaluation. Of the selected 23 articles, the majority (15 studies10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15,,,24, 25, 26, 27, 28,,) reported the 1-year pacemaker dependency (Figure 2). The pacemaker dependency rate varied across time (Figure 3); it was 51.2% (16.7%-84.6%, n = 4) already at discharge, 57.9% (43.1%-71.3%, n = 10) at 1 month, 45.3%% (27.5%-64.5%, n = 8) at 6 months, and 49.5% (37.1%-61.9%, n = 15) at 1 year.
Figure 2

Pacemaker dependency at 1 year. Bars represent 1-year pacemaker dependency. The rate of pacemaker dependency ranged from 7% to 89% in individual studies.

Figure 3

Rate of pacemaker dependency across the time after TAVI. Pooled percentage is reported with 95% confidence limits (blue line). Light blue bars represent number of studies. Yellow line is the interpolation line. UCL, Upper confidence limit; LCL, lower confidence limit.

Pacemaker dependency at 1 year. Bars represent 1-year pacemaker dependency. The rate of pacemaker dependency ranged from 7% to 89% in individual studies. Rate of pacemaker dependency across the time after TAVI. Pooled percentage is reported with 95% confidence limits (blue line). Light blue bars represent number of studies. Yellow line is the interpolation line. UCL, Upper confidence limit; LCL, lower confidence limit.

Influence of Baseline Right Bundle Branch Block (RBBB) and Atrial Fibrillation (AF) on 1-Year Pacemaker Dependency

In 6 studies,,,,,, among 531 patients undergoing pacemaker interrogation at 1 year, pacemaker dependency was present from 22% to 54% of the patients, and the difference between patients with and without baseline RBBB could be analyzed. The pooled OR was 1.76 (95% CI, 1.06-2.93). There was low heterogeneity (I2 = 14%) among the studies (Figure 4), nor was there publication bias (Figure E1). The Egger's test was not significant (P = .90). Leave-one-out study analysis (Table E4), as shown in the paper by Chan and colleagues influenced the pooled analysis, since leaving it in, the pooled estimates was not significant anymore. The association between preimplant RBBB and 1-year pacemaker dependency was not influenced by age (r = 0.0917, P = .6050), time of PPI (r = 0.0918, P = .9222), or sample size (r = 0.0920, P = .9245).
Figure 4

Impact of baseline RBBB on 1-year rate of pacemaker dependency Forest plot. Patients with baseline RBBB have 2-fold greater risk to develop pacemaker dependency 1 year after TAVI. TE, Log odds ratio; SE, standard error; IV, weighted mean difference; CI, confidence limits; PM, pacemaker.

Figure E1

Funnel plot on the impact of baseline RBBB on 1-year rate of pacemaker dependency. No publication bias was found among studies reporting the influence of baseline RBBB on pacemaker dependency.

Table E4

Leave-one-study out analysis

Left-out studyOR95% CIP value
RBBB
 Kaplan 2019152.37981.1797-4.8008.0155
 Nadeem 2018202.24251.0932-4.6002.0276
 Raelson 2017132.09601.0400-4.2241.0385
 Costa 2019271.93451.0126-3.9288.0479
 Meduri 2019311.88501.0136-3.7261.0483
 Chan 2018251.63860.8001-3.3559.1770
AF
 Kaplan 2019151.22200.4251-3.5122.7098
 Nadeem 2018200.98290.3378-2.8599.9748
 Raelson 2017130.90940.2919-2.8336.8699
 Chan 2018251.45510.5188-4.0811.4760
SE
 Kaplan 2019151.92331.0326-3.7266.0426
 Nadeem 2018202.34321.1402-4.8153.0205
 Raelson 2017132.54191.3676-4.7244.0032
 Van Gils 2017122.39471.1342-5.0562.0220
 Urena 2014101.86860.8743-3.9938.1067
 Takahashi 2018241.87111.0048-3.4844.0483

OR, Odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; RBBB, right bundle branch block; AF, atrial fibrillation; SE, self-expandable.

Impact of baseline RBBB on 1-year rate of pacemaker dependency Forest plot. Patients with baseline RBBB have 2-fold greater risk to develop pacemaker dependency 1 year after TAVI. TE, Log odds ratio; SE, standard error; IV, weighted mean difference; CI, confidence limits; PM, pacemaker. The impact of baseline AF could be investigated in 4 studies,,, and revealed no effect on 1-year pacemaker dependency (pooled OR, 1.71; 95% CI, 0.83-3.53) (Figure 5). Again, there was neither heterogeneity among the studies nor publication bias (Figure E2) The Egger's test was not significant (P = .79). On-leave out study analysis (Table E4) confirmed as AF had no impact on pooled analysis.
Figure 5

Impact of baseline AF on 1-year rate of pacemaker dependency. Forest plot. Patients with baseline AF have no greater risk to develop pacemaker dependency 1 year after TAVI. TE, Log odds ratio; SE, standard error; IV, weighted mean difference; CI, confidence limits; PM, pacemaker.

Figure E2

Funnel plot on the influence of baseline AF on pacemaker dependency. No publication bias was found among studies reporting the influence of baseline AF on pacemaker dependency.

Impact of baseline AF on 1-year rate of pacemaker dependency. Forest plot. Patients with baseline AF have no greater risk to develop pacemaker dependency 1 year after TAVI. TE, Log odds ratio; SE, standard error; IV, weighted mean difference; CI, confidence limits; PM, pacemaker.

Type of Implanted Prosthesis on 1-Year Pacemaker Dependency

The comparison between SE and BE protheses in terms of 1-year pacemaker dependency could be evaluated in 6studies (796 patients).,,,,, Patients who received SE prostheses had 2-fold greater risk for pacemaker dependency 1 year after TAVI (Figure 6). moderate heterogeneity was found (I2 = 43%). No publication bias was identified (Figure E3). The Egger's test was not significant (P = .5658). Leave-one-out study analysis (Table E4) showed as the paper by Urena and colleagues influenced the pooled analysis, since leaving it, the pooled estimates was not significant anymore. The association between preimplant SE and 1-year pacemaker dependency was not influenced by age (r = 0.1265, P = .5012), time of PPI (r = –1.1506, P = .0.6262), or sample size (r = 0.1123, P = .9812). The pacemaker dependency rate was significantly greater in those studies including more than 50% of SE prostheses (Figure E4).
Figure 6

Impact of SE prosthesis (vs BE) on 1-year rate of pacemaker dependency. Forest plot. Patients with SE prosthesis have 2-fold greater risk to develop pacemaker dependency at 1 year after TAVI. TE, Log odds ratio; SE, standard error; IV, weighted mean difference; CI, confidence limits; PM, pacemaker.

Figure E3

Funnel plot on the influence of SE versus BE valves on pacemaker dependency. No publication bias was found among studies reporting the influence of SE versus BE on pacemaker dependency.

Figure E4

Forest plot pooling pacemaker dependency according to percentage of SE prosthesis included in the study. IV, Weighted mean difference; CI, confidence interval; SE, self-expandable.

Impact of SE prosthesis (vs BE) on 1-year rate of pacemaker dependency. Forest plot. Patients with SE prosthesis have 2-fold greater risk to develop pacemaker dependency at 1 year after TAVI. TE, Log odds ratio; SE, standard error; IV, weighted mean difference; CI, confidence limits; PM, pacemaker.

Third-Degree Atrioventricular Block and 1-Year Pacemaker Dependency

One-year pacemaker dependency rate was not significantly different between study where pacemaker was implanted due to third-degree atrioventricular block in a rate ranging from70%-79% (41.4%; 26.1%-58.5%), 80%-99% (48.3%; 21.3%-76.5%), and 100% (53.8%, 45.6%-61.7%), P = .427.

Complications and Multivariable Predictors of PPI

Only 5 studies,,,, reported the PPI-related complications. The rate of PPI-related complications ranged from 1.2% to 6%. The list of various complications is reported in Table 2. Information about predictors of PPI were provided by 7 studies (5319 patients). Pre-existing RBBB was the most frequent determinant factor of PPI. Regarding pacemaker dependency after TAVI at follow-up, multivariable analysis to investigate the predictors was performed in 5 studies: early PPI after TAVI, PPI on day 1, and larger aortic annular size, were found as independent predictor of persistent atrioventricular conduction disturbances. In contrast, 2 studies failed to demonstrate significant predictors for atrioventricular conduction recovery or pacemaker dependency.,

Discussion

The main findings of this systematic review regarding PPI and subsequent recovery of atrioventricular conduction or persistent pacemaker dependency in TAVI are as follows (Figure 7): (1) up to 50% of the patients with PPI after TAVI exhibit no pacemaker dependency at 1 year follow-up; (2) patients with baseline RBBB and (3) SE prosthesis have 2-fold greater risk to develop pacemaker dependency 1 year after TAVI; and (4) baseline AF does not influence the risk of pacemaker dependency at 1 year.
Figure 7

Up to 50% of the patients with permanent pacemaker implantation following TAVI exhibits no pacemaker dependency at 1-year follow-up. TAVI, Transcatheter aortic valve implantation; PPI, permanent pacemaker implantation; RBBB, right bundle branch block; TE, log odds ratio; SE, standard error; IV, weighted mean difference; CI, confidence limits; PM, pacemaker.

Up to 50% of the patients with permanent pacemaker implantation following TAVI exhibits no pacemaker dependency at 1-year follow-up. TAVI, Transcatheter aortic valve implantation; PPI, permanent pacemaker implantation; RBBB, right bundle branch block; TE, log odds ratio; SE, standard error; IV, weighted mean difference; CI, confidence limits; PM, pacemaker. Several recent reports show that atrioventricular conduction defects requiring PPI post-TAVI may involve as much as 30% of the treated patients, therefore representing the most frequent complication in such a setting. However, nearly 50% of such patients are not pacemaker-dependent at 1-year follow-up, with recovery of atrioventricular conduction occurring even at a very early stage after implant, like before hospital discharge. Nonetheless, the range of postimplant pacemaker dependency or effective atrioventricular conduction restoration varies largely, ranging from 7% to 89%. This wide interval could be explained by heterogeneity and lack of consensus on pacemaker dependency definition. This limitation negatively influenced the study data interpretation in our analysis. Furthermore, pacemaker dependency may intermittently occur, thereby characterizing a different pattern of pacing dependency. This peculiar aspect was not available but might represent an additional factor to be investigated. In our analysis, patients receiving SE valves and presenting with a preoperative RBBB had a 2-fold greater risk to have persistent pacing dependency at 1 year after TAVI. Ramazzina and colleagues (Table E2) showed that atrioventricular block as indication for PPI was always associated with pacemaker dependency at follow-up. In contrast, Gaede and colleagues demonstrated a low rate of long-term persistence of atrioventricular block after TAVI procedure. A few studies address investigate predictors of pacemaker dependency after TAVI. Naveh and colleagues (Table E2) showed that baseline RBBB, long post-TAVI PR interval, and delayed PR interval from baseline were independent predictors for long-term pacemaker dependency. Sharma and colleagues (Table E2) showed that bifascicular block, RBBB, intraprocedural complete heart block, and QRS duration >120 milliseconds were associated with pacemaker dependency at 30-day follow-up. The impact of baseline AF on pacemaker dependency at follow-up is controversial. Early PPI after TAVI procedure was the strongest predictor regarding persistent atrioventricular block and pacemaker dependency, based on large sample-size studies., According to these findings, we should emphasize that patients without baseline characteristics potentially leading to pacemaker dependency should benefit from other temporary leadless system as Micra AV (Medtronic, Minneapolis, Minn) to reduce the rate of permanent pacemaker implanted, as the Micra AV system is recently found to be safe; efficient and as performant as transvenous single-chamber pacemaker., Nowadays, guidelines regarding timing of PPI after TAVI are rather cloudy and not based on thorough clinical investigations., Due to the lack of consistent data, the dilemma about the appropriate timing for pacemaker implantation after TAVI is left to the discretion of the attending cardiologist according to the different centers' policies and therefore is associated with extreme variability in clinical management. Erkapic and colleagues showed that atrioventricular block occurs in more than 90% of the cases within the first post-TAVI week, which would allow to monitor carefully the patients at least seven days before considering PPI. However, some others studies support early PPI after TAVI procedure. Actually, as the optimal timing for PPI after TAVI is not established, the variability of decision certainly influences the outcome of pacemaker dependency, making difficult to conclude about the best interval to proceed to a definitive PPI. PPI after TAVI is associated with increased long-term mortality. Faroux and colleagues show the negative impact of PPI after TAVI on survival and heart failure hospitalization within the year following TAVI. Xi and colleagues also show a greater all-cause mortality in TAVI patients receiving a PPI. In this systematic review, only 4 studies addressed the PPI-related complications and only 8 studies reported the 30-day mortality, making the overall appraisal of the impact of PPI on patient outcome likely underestimated, as emphasized by the Danish experience of Kirkfeldt and colleagues. Report on PPI-related complications is also markedly variable and the lack of a standardize international classification of these complications may further contribute to PPI-related complications and related outcome actually under-reported.

Limitations

This systematic review had several limitations that should be acknowledged. First, the follow-up varied remarkably among the included studies. The 1-year dependency was not available for all studies, limiting the conclusion to only 15 studies, whereas the others publications provided a follow-up mainly to 1 to 3 months. Only 3 studies presented a longer follow-up up to 4 years. Second, the heterogeneity about pacemaker dependency definition in the studies semantically limits our ability to compare the studies. Third, although several studies identified some risk-factors for PPI and only 1 study states multivariable predictors of pacemaker dependency, there was no agreement between studies. Finally, this is a systematic review of the literature; analysis of individual patients-data level may provide further understandings: in many of studies it was not specifically clear if the patient's native rhythm was assessed and thereby knowing for certain which patients truly required PPI.

Conclusions

This systematic review investigates the rate and predictors of pacing dependency after TAVI. Data from literature show that almost one half of the pacemakers are actively operating at 1-year follow-up. Baseline RBBB and SE valves are associated with a greater rate of pacemaker dependency at follow-up. These findings suggest that atrioventricular conduction disturbances after TAVI are reversible in a large percentage of patients. Such a condition may occur at variable time after the TAVI procedure, even within the TAVI-related hospitalization and, therefore, at a very early stage. These findings clearly indicate the need of thorough investigations regarding timing of pacemaker implantation, recovery of atrioventricular conduction, and predictors of pacemaker dependence as endpoints for further studies.

Conflict of Interest Statement

Dr Vernooy reported research grant from . Dr Van't Hof reported grants from Medtronic, Astra Zeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Abbott. Dr Lorusso reported grants from Medtronic, LivaNova, and Eurosets. All other authors reported no conflicts of interest. The Journal policy requires editors and reviewers to disclose conflicts of interest and to decline handling or reviewing manuscripts for which they may have a conflict of interest. The editors and reviewers of this article have no conflicts of interest.
  66 in total

1.  Long-term pacemaker dependency and impact of pacing on mortality following transcatheter aortic valve replacement with the LOTUS valve.

Authors:  Mohammad Alasti; Hashrul Rashid; Karthikeyan Rangasamy; Emily Kotschet; David Adam; Jeff Alison; Robert Gooley; Sarah Zaman
Journal:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2018-01-04       Impact factor: 2.692

2.  Impact of Right Ventricular Pacing in Patients Who Underwent Implantation of Permanent Pacemaker After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.

Authors:  Fahd Nadeem; Takahiro Tsushima; Thomas P Ladas; Rahul B Thomas; Sandeep M Patel; Petar Saric; Toral Patel; Jerry Lipinski; Jun Li; Marco A Costa; Daniel I Simon; Ankur Kalra; Guillherme F Attizzani; Mauricio S Arruda; Judith Mackall; Sergio G Thal
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  2018-08-21       Impact factor: 2.778

3.  Quality Control for Permanent Pacemaker Implantation After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

Authors:  Farhang Yazdchi; Sameer Hirji; Tsuyoshi Kaneko
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2019-12-14       Impact factor: 4.330

4.  Conduction recovery and avoidance of permanent pacing after transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

Authors:  Corinne Marzahn; Cornel Koban; Martin Seifert; Akihiro Isotani; Michael Neuß; Frank Hölschermann; Christian Butter
Journal:  J Cardiol       Date:  2017-08-14       Impact factor: 3.159

5.  Persistent conduction abnormalities and requirements for pacemaking six months after transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

Authors:  Nicolo Piazza; Rutger-Jan Nuis; Apostolos Tzikas; Amber Otten; Yoshinobu Onuma; Hector García-García; Carl Schultz; Ron van Domburg; Gerrit-Anne van Es; Robert van Geuns; Peter de Jaegere; Patrick W Serruys
Journal:  EuroIntervention       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 6.534

6.  Arrhythmic Burden as Determined by Ambulatory Continuous Cardiac Monitoring in Patients With New-Onset Persistent Left Bundle Branch Block Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: The MARE Study.

Authors:  Josep Rodés-Cabau; Marina Urena; Luis Nombela-Franco; Ignacio Amat-Santos; Neal Kleiman; Antonio Munoz-Garcia; Felipe Atienza; Vicenç Serra; Marc W Deyell; Gabriela Veiga-Fernandez; Jean-Bernard Masson; Victoria Canadas-Godoy; Dominique Himbert; Javier Castrodeza; Jaime Elizaga; Jaume Francisco Pascual; John G Webb; Jose Maria de la Torre; Lluis Asmarats; Emilie Pelletier-Beaumont; François Philippon
Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2018-07-18       Impact factor: 11.195

7.  Timing of Onset and Outcome of New Conduction Abnormalities Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: Role of Balloon Aortic Valvuloplasty.

Authors:  Francisco Campelo-Parada; Luis Nombela-Franco; Marina Urena; Ander Regueiro; Pilar Jiménez-Quevedo; María Del Trigo; Chekrallah Chamandi; Tania Rodríguez-Gabella; Vincent Auffret; Omar Abdul-Jawad Altisent; Robert DeLarochellière; Jean-Michel Paradis; Eric Dumont; François Philippon; Nicasio Pérez-Castellano; Rishi Puri; Carlos Macaya; Josep Rodés-Cabau
Journal:  Rev Esp Cardiol (Engl Ed)       Date:  2017-05-27

8.  Long-Term Outcomes in Patients With New Permanent Pacemaker Implantation Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

Authors:  Chekrallah Chamandi; Marco Barbanti; Antonio Munoz-Garcia; Azeem Latib; Luis Nombela-Franco; Enrique Gutiérrez-Ibanez; Gabriela Veiga-Fernandez; Asim N Cheema; Ignacio Cruz-Gonzalez; Vicenç Serra; Corrado Tamburino; Antonio Mangieri; Antonio Colombo; Pilar Jiménez-Quevedo; Jaime Elizaga; Gerard Laughlin; Dae-Hyun Lee; Bruno Garcia Del Blanco; Tania Rodriguez-Gabella; Josep-Ramon Marsal; Mélanie Côté; François Philippon; Josep Rodés-Cabau
Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2018-02-12       Impact factor: 11.195

9.  Pacemaker memory in post-TAVI patients: Who should benefit from permanent pacemaker implantation?

Authors:  Adrian Mirolo; Guillaume Viart; Eric Durand; Arnaud Savouré; Bénédicte Godin; Nathanaël Auquier; Olivier Raitière; Hélène Eltchaninoff; Frédéric Anselme
Journal:  Pacing Clin Electrophysiol       Date:  2018-07-16       Impact factor: 1.976

Review 10.  A systematic review of ICD complications in randomised controlled trials versus registries: is our 'real-world' data an underestimation?

Authors:  Vivienne A Ezzat; Victor Lee; Syed Ahsan; Anthony W Chow; Oliver Segal; Edward Rowland; Martin D Lowe; Pier D Lambiase
Journal:  Open Heart       Date:  2015-02-17
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.