Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
: 20 | 50 | 100
1 - 3 de 3
1.
JACC Cardiovasc Interv ; 17(4): 552-560, 2024 Feb 26.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38418058

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter tricuspid valve replacement (TTVR) abolishes tricuspid regurgitation (TR) and has emerged as a definitive treatment for TR. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this multicenter, observational study was to determine the clinical characteristics and short-term outcomes of patients with TR screened for TTVR. METHODS: Patients underwent TTVR screening at 7 centers on a compassionate-use basis. The primary endpoints were NYHA functional class and TR grade at 30-day follow-up. Secondary endpoints included all-cause mortality, heart failure hospitalization, technical success, and reasons for TTVR screening failure. RESULTS: A total of 149 patients (median age 79 years [Q1-Q3: 72-84 years], 54% women) underwent TTVR screening. The TTVR screening failure rate was 74%, mainly related to large tricuspid annular diameter. Patients undergoing TTVR (n = 38) had significant functional improvements (NYHA functional class I or II from 21% to 68%; P < 0.001), with TR ≤1+ in 97% at 30-day follow-up (P < 0.001 from baseline). Technical success was achieved in 91%, with no intraprocedural mortality or conversion to surgery. At 30-day follow-up, mortality was 8%, heart failure hospitalization 5%, major bleeding 18%, and reintervention 9%. Patients who failed screening for TTVR and subsequently underwent "bailout" transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (n = 26) had favorable outcomes (NYHA functional class I or II from 27% to 58%; P < 0.001), with TR ≤1+ in 43% at 30-day follow-up (P < 0.001 from baseline). CONCLUSIONS: This first real-world report of TTVR screening demonstrated a high screening failure rate, mainly related to large tricuspid annular diameter. Patients undergoing TTVR had superior TR reduction and symptom alleviation compared with bailout tricuspid transcatheter edge-to-edge repair, at the cost of greater procedural complications.


Heart Failure , Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation , Tricuspid Valve Insufficiency , Humans , Female , Aged , Male , Tricuspid Valve/diagnostic imaging , Tricuspid Valve/surgery , Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation/adverse effects , Hemodynamics , Cardiac Catheterization/adverse effects , Treatment Outcome , Recovery of Function , Time Factors , Severity of Illness Index , Tricuspid Valve Insufficiency/diagnostic imaging , Tricuspid Valve Insufficiency/surgery , Registries
2.
Ann Thorac Surg ; 115(6): 1446-1454, 2023 06.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35952857

BACKGROUND: We evaluated the incidence, prognosis, and predictive factors of new onset of persistent left bundle branch block (NOP-LBBB) after rapid-deployment aortic valve replacement (RD-AVR). METHODS: This was an observational, retrospective, single-center study of 274 consecutive patients with no baseline ventricular conduction disorder and no previous permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) who underwent RD-AVR with an INTUITY valve (n = 55) or INTUITY Elite Valve (n = 219) (Edwards Lifesciences). Transthoracic echocardiography and 12-lead electrocardiography was performed preoperatively, at discharge, and at 1-month and 1-year intervals. The incidence, prognosis, and predictive factors of NOP-LBBB were evaluated. RESULTS: NOP-LBBB occurred in 58 patients (21.2%) after discharge. In multivariate analysis, age (P < .01), INTUITY valve diameter ≥23 mm (P = .02), and INTUITY Elite implantation (P = .01) were independent predictors of NOP-LBBB. By 1:1 propensity matching analysis between the NOP-LBBB group and the control group, there were no significant differences in 1-year overall mortality (P = .23), hospitalization for congestive heart failure (P = .99), or PPI (P = .99). NOP-LBBB exposed patients to a high rate of dysrhythmic events (12.1% vs 1.4%, P < .01) and was associated with a significant decrease in left ventricular ejection fraction (0.62 ± 0.095 vs 0.652 ± 0.0783, P = .02) without an impact on New York Heart Association functional status (1.25 ± 0.32 and 1.52 ± 0.70, P = .32). PPI was performed in 17 patients (6.2%) before discharge, including 14 NOP-LBBB patients. CONCLUSIONS: NOP-LBBB after RD-AVR is prevalent in patients with no prior conduction disorders. INTUITY Elite is associated with a significantly higher rate of NOP-LBBB. The persistence of NOP-LBBB predisposed patients to the occurrence of high-grade conduction disorders and might have led to PPI but did not increase death or hospitalization for congestive heart failure.


Aortic Valve Stenosis , Heart Failure , Heart Valve Prosthesis , Pacemaker, Artificial , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement , Humans , Aortic Valve/surgery , Bundle-Branch Block/diagnosis , Bundle-Branch Block/epidemiology , Bundle-Branch Block/etiology , Stroke Volume , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/adverse effects , Retrospective Studies , Treatment Outcome , Incidence , Aortic Valve Stenosis/surgery , Ventricular Function, Left , Heart Valve Prosthesis/adverse effects , Electrocardiography , Heart Failure/surgery , Pacemaker, Artificial/adverse effects
3.
Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc ; 39: 100961, 2022 Apr.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35155737

AIMS: Electrophysiological study (EPS) is recommended in case of new-onset persistent left bundle branch block (NOP-LBBB) after transaortic valve implantation (TAVI) to identify patients at high risk of delayed atrioventricular block (D-AVB). We evaluated the added value of drug challenge, after normal baseline EPS, to predict D-AVB in such patients. METHODS: We conducted a comparative single-centre study of two successive periods, during which we used baseline EPS alone (first period) or drug challenge in case of normal baseline EPS (second period), for patients with NOP-LBBB after TAVI. The primary endpoint was a composite of pacemaker use, documented D-AVB, cardiac syncope, sudden death, or delayed pacemaker implantation. RESULTS: Among 736 patients with TAVI implantation between January 2016 and September 2019, 64 with NOP-LBBB were included. During the first period, 4/22 (18.2%) presented with a positive baseline EPS. After a mean (standard deviation [SD]) of 15.6 (8.3) months, 7/22 (31.8%) reached the primary endpoint. During the second period, 19/42 (45.2%) presented with a positive EPS. After a mean (SD) of 12.8 (3.5) months, 8/42 (19.0%) reached the primary endpoint. There was a tendency to increased sensitivity (42.9-87.5%; P = 0.12) and negative predictive value (77.8-95.7%; P = 0.15) of the EPS, respectively during the first to the second period. However, the specificity decreased (93.3-64.7%; P = 0.04). CONCLUSION: Diagnostic yield improved with drug challenge in case of normal baseline EPS. However, the decrease in specificity led to a high rate of unnecessary pacemaker implantation.

...