Tricuspid regurgitation associated with implantable electrical device insertion: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) and permanent pacemaker (PPM) lead placement may worsen or result in tricuspid regurgitation (TR). While the association between lead placement and the incidence of TR has been established, current understanding of this problem remains incomplete. This systematic review and meta-analysis sought to pool the existing evidence to better understand the occurrence and severity of TR associated with cardiac implantable electrical device (CIED) insertion. METHODS: An electronic search was performed to identify all relevant studies published from 2000 to 2018. Overall, 15 studies were selected for the analysis comprising 4019 patients with data reported on TR development following ICD or PPM lead placement. Demographic information, perioperative clinical variables, and clinical outcome measures, including pre and postoperative echocardiographic TR grade changes, were extracted and pooled for systematic review. RESULTS: Mean patient age was 69 years [95% CI: 64.62-73.59], and 63% [95% CI: 57-68] were male. Devices implanted included ICD in 57% [95%CI: 43-70] and PPM in 41% [95%CI: 31-52]. The most common indications for pacemaker implantation were sick sinus syndrome in 22% [95% CI: 22-37] and AV block in 21% [95%CI:12-34. The commonest indications for ICD implantation were primary and secondary prevention of sudden cardiac death. Atrial fibrillation was present in 37% [95%CI: 28-46] and congestive heart failure in 15% [95%CI: 2-57]. Baseline distribution of TR grades were as follows: grade 0/1 TR in 89% [95%CI: 82-93], grade 2 TR in 8% [95%CI: 5-13], grade 3 TR in 2% [95%CI: 0-7] and grade 4 TR in 2% [95%CI: 1-4]. Post-procedure, grade 0/ 1 TR decreased to 68% [95% CI: 51-81] (p < 0.01), grade 2 TR increased to 21% [15-28] (p < 0.01), grade 3 TR increased to 13% [95%CI: 5-32] (p = 0.02), and grade 4 TR increased to 7% [95%CI: 5-9] (p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: ICD and PPM lead placement is associated with increased TR post-procedure. Further studies are warranted to evaluate changes in TR grade in the long term.

Characterizing Adaptive Changes and Patient Survival After 2018 Donor Allocation Restructuring: A UNOS Database Analysis.

PURPOSE: We sought to characterize adaptive changes to the revised United Network for Organ Sharing donor heart allocation policy and estimate long-term survival trends for heart transplant (HTx) recipients. METHODS: Patients listed for HTx between October 17, 2013 and September 30, 2021 were identified from the United Network for Organ Sharing database, and stratified into pre- and postpolicy revision groups. Subanalyses were performed to examine trends in device utilization for extracorporeal membranous oxygenation (ECMO), durable left ventricular assist device (LVAD), intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP), microaxial support (Impella), and no mechanical circulatory support (non-MCS). Survival data post-HTx were fitted to parametric distributions and extrapolated to 5 years. RESULTS: We identified 27,523 HTx waitlist candidates during the study period, most of whom (n = 16,376) were waitlisted in the prepolicy change period. Overall, 19,554 patients underwent HTx during the study period (pre: 12,037 and post: 7517). Listings increased after the policy change for ECMO ( P < 0.01), Impella ( P < 0.01), and IABP ( P < 0.01) patients. Listings for LVAD ( P < 0.01) and non-MCS ( P < 0.01) patients decreased. HTx increased for ECMO ( P < 0.01), Impella ( P < 0.01), and IABP ( P < 0.01) patients after the policy change and decreased for LVAD ( P < 0.01) and non-MCS ( P < 0.01) patients. Waitlist survival increased for the overall ( P < 0.01), ECMO ( P < 0.01), IABP ( P < 0.01), and non-MCS ( P < 0.01) groups. Waitlist survival did not differ for the LVAD ( P = 0.8) and Impella ( P = 0.1) groups. Post-transplant survival decreased for the overall ( P < 0.01), LVAD ( P < 0.01), and non-MCS ( P < 0.01) populations. CONCLUSIONS: Allocation policy revisions have contributed to greater utilization of ECMO, Impella, and IABP, decreased utilization of LVADs and non-MCS, increased waitlist survival, and decreased post-HTx survival.