A novel approach for venous occlusion after endocavitary leads. The balloon-assisted tracking technique.

The balloon-assisted tracking technique can be useful in short venous occlusions that conventional venoplasty fails. This technique could be feasible and with an expected low complication rate.

Prosthesis-patient mismatch after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: prevalence and medium term prognostic impact.

Prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) occurs when the effective orifice area of the prosthesis is too small in relation to the patient's body surface area. There are few data available on the frequency and prognostic impact of PPM after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Our aim was to determine the prevalence of PPM and to investigate its association with medium-term clinical course of patients undergoing TAVI. We included 185 patients undergoing TAVI (79 ± 5 years, 49% male, 98% CoreValve) between April-2008 and December-2014. The effective orifice area (EOA) was determined by transthoracic echocardiography prior and after the procedure. We defined PPM as indexed EOA ≤ 0.85 cm2/m2 (severe PPM if ≤ 0.65 cm2/m2). All cause death, stroke and hospitalization for heart failure were considered as major clinical events. 45 patients (24%) showed PPM (severe 11 patients, 6%). PPM was associated with a higher EuroSCORE (OR 1.06, IC 95% 1.01-1.12, p = 0.03), body surface area ≥ 1.72 m2 (OR 3.58, IC 95% 1.30-9.87, p = 0.01) and small aortic annulus (OR 0.73, IC 95% 0.55-0.92, p = 0.03); and severe PPM with small prostheses size (OR 17.79, IC 95% 1.87-169.78, p = 0.012). The mean event-free survival was 34 ± 26 months. Patients with severe PPM showed lower rates of event free survival than the rest of the series (52% vs. 84%, p = 0.04) at 34 months follow up. In our series, PPM was present in a quarter of the patients after TAVI. Higher EuroSCORE, smaller prosthesis size, larger body surface area and smaller aortic annulus diameter were associated with PPM. Severe PPM was an independent factor associated with major events at medium-term follow up.

Effect of New-Onset Left Bundle Branch Block After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (CoreValve) on Mortality, Frequency of Re-Hospitalization, and Need for Pacemaker.

New-onset conduction disturbances are common after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). The most common complication is left bundle branch block (LBBB). The clinical impact of new-onset LBBB after TAVI remains controversial. The aim of this study was to analyze the clinical impact of new-onset LBBB in terms of mortality and morbidity (need for pacemakers and admissions for heart failure) at long-term follow-up. From April 2008 to December 2014, 220 patients who had severe aortic stenosis were treated with the implantation of a CoreValve prosthesis. Sixty-seven of these patients were excluded from the analysis, including 22 patients with pre-existing LBBB and 45 with a permanent pacemaker, implanted previously or within 72 hours of implantation. The remaining 153 patients were divided into 2 groups: group 1 (n = 80), those with persistent new-onset LBBB, and group 2 (n = 73), those without conduction disturbances after treatment. Both groups were followed up at 1 month, 6 months, 12 months, and yearly thereafter. Persistent new-onset LBBB occurred in 80 patients (36%) immediately after TAVI; 73 patients (33%) did not develop conduction disturbances. The mean follow-up time of both groups was 32 ± 22 months (range 3 to 82 months), and there were no differences in time between the groups. There were no differences in mortality between the groups (39% vs 48%, p = 0.58). No differences were observed between the groups in re-hospitalizations for heart failure (11% vs 16%, p = 0.55). Group 1 did not require pacemaker implantation more often at follow-up (10% vs 13%, p = 0.38) than group 2. In conclusion, new-onset LBBB was not associated with a higher incidence of late need for a permanent pacemaker after CoreValve implantation. In addition, it was not associated with a higher risk of late mortality or re-hospitalization.

Modificación de la conducción auriculoventricular tras el implante de prótesis aórtica Core Valve / Atrioventricular conduction changes after corevalve transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Introducción y objetivos: Con frecuencia se producen alteraciones en la conducción tras el implante de una prótesis CoreValve. Se pretende analizar qué cambios se producen en la conducción cardiaca de pacientes con estenosis aórtica tratados con este tipo de prótesis. Métodos: Desde abril de 2008 hasta diciembre de 2013, se seleccionó a 181 pacientes con estenosis aórtica grave tratados con esta prótesis y estudiados mediante electrocardiograma. Se estudió a un subgrupo de 137 pacientes consecutivos (75,7%) mediante electrocardiogramas intracavitarios antes y tras implante protésico. El objetivo principal del estudio es la necesidad de marcapasos definitivo en las primeras 72 h tras el implante protésico. Se analizaron numerosas variables para predecir esta eventualidad. Resultados: Tras el implante, los intervalos PR y QRS se incrementaron de 173 ± 47 a 190 ± 52 ms (p < 0,01) y de 98 ± 22 a 129 ± 24 ms (p < 0,01), mientras que los intervalos AH y HV se alargaron de 95 ± 39 a 108 ± 41 ms (p < 0,01) y de 54 ± 10 a 66 ± 23 ms (p < 0,01). En total, 89 pacientes (49%) presentaron bloqueo de rama izquierda de novo y 33 (25%) precisaron marcapasos en las primeras 72 h. Los predictores independientes de marcapasos fueron el bloqueo de rama derecha basal y la profundidad protésica. Los intervalos intracavitarios carecieron de valor predictivo. Además, 13 pacientes requirieron marcapasos después de las 72 h. Conclusiones: El implante de prótesis CoreValve produce alta incidencia de alteraciones de la conducción; la más frecuente es el bloqueo de rama izquierda; el 25% de los pacientes precisaron marcapasos definitivo. La necesidad de marcapasos se relacionó con el bloqueo de rama derecha basal y la profundidad protésica (AU)

Introduction and objectives: Conduction disturbances often occur after CoreValve transcatheter aortic valve implantation. The aim was to analyze which cardiac conduction changes occur in patients with aortic stenosis treated with this type of prosthesis. Methods: A total of 181 patients with severe aortic stenosis treated with this prosthesis and studied by electrocardiography between April 2008 and December 2013 were selected. A subgroup of 137 (75.7%) consecutive patients was studied by intracardiac electrocardiogram before and after prosthesis implantation. The primary endpoint of the study was the need for a permanent pacemaker within 72 hours after prosthesis implantation. Numerous variables to predict this possibility were analyzed. Results: Following implantation, PR and QRS intervals were increased from 173 ± 47 ms to 190 ± 52 ms (P < .01) and from 98 ± 22 ms to 129 ± 24 ms (P < .01), whereas the A-H and H-V intervals were prolonged from 95 ± 39 ms to 108 ± 41 ms (P < .01) and from 54 ± 10 ms to 66 ± 23 ms (P < .01). A total of 89 (49%) patients had new-onset left bundle-branch block, and 33 (25%) required a pacemaker within the first 72 hours. The independent predictors for a pacemaker were baseline right bundle-branch block and prosthetic depth. Intracardiac intervals had no predictive value. In addition, 13 patients required a pacemaker after 72 hours. Conclusions: CoreValve prosthesis implantation has a high incidence of conduction disturbance, with left bundle-branch block being the most common. A total of 25% of patients required a permanent pacemaker. The need for a pacemaker was related to baseline right bundle-branch block and prosthetic depth (AU)

Atrioventricular Conduction Changes After CoreValve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Conduction disturbances often occur after CoreValve transcatheter aortic valve implantation. The aim was to analyze which cardiac conduction changes occur in patients with aortic stenosis treated with this type of prosthesis. METHODS: A total of 181 patients with severe aortic stenosis treated with this prosthesis and studied by electrocardiography between April 2008 and December 2013 were selected. A subgroup of 137 (75.7%) consecutive patients was studied by intracardiac electrocardiogram before and after prosthesis implantation. The primary endpoint of the study was the need for a permanent pacemaker within 72 hours after prosthesis implantation. Numerous variables to predict this possibility were analyzed. RESULTS: Following implantation, PR and QRS intervals were increased from 173±47 ms to 190±52ms (P < .01) and from 98±22ms to 129±24 ms (P < .01), whereas the A-H and H-V intervals were prolonged from 95±39ms to 108±41ms (P < .01) and from 54±10ms to 66±23ms (P < .01). A total of 89 (49%) patients had new-onset left bundle-branch block, and 33 (25%) required a pacemaker within the first 72hours. The independent predictors for a pacemaker were baseline right bundle-branch block and prosthetic depth. Intracardiac intervals had no predictive value. In addition, 13 patients required a pacemaker after 72 hours. CONCLUSIONS: CoreValve prosthesis implantation has a high incidence of conduction disturbance, with left bundle-branch block being the most common. A total of 25% of patients required a permanent pacemaker. The need for a pacemaker was related to baseline right bundle-branch block and prosthetic depth.

Measurement of aortic valve annulus using different cardiac imaging techniques in transcatheter aortic valve implantation: agreement with finally implanted prosthesis size.

AIMS: To compare the measurements of the aortic annulus obtained with various imaging techniques in patients with severe aortic stenosis scheduled for transcatheter aortic valve implantation, and to determine the grade of agreement between the predicted size of the prosthesis for each technique, and the size of the finally implanted valve. METHODS AND RESULTS: The aortic annulus was measured in 40 patients treated by transcatheter aortic valve implantation (CoreValve aortic valve) with transthoracic (TTE) and transesophageal echocardiography (TEE), 64-slice tomography, and angiography. A large valve was implanted when annulus was >23 mm and a small one if it was ≤23 mm. If the size of the prosthesis predicted by several techniques was not the same in one case, we selected the size in which more techniques presented agreement. Forty aortic valves, 26 small and 14 large, were implanted percutaneously. The best correlation was obtained with TTE and TEE (r = 0.93, P < 0.001). The correlation of TTE and TEE with angiography also was good (r = 0.58, P < 0.001 and r = 0.53, P < 0.001, respectively). Correlations between these techniques and computed tomography were poor (P = NS for all comparisons). The best agreement between estimated aortic annulus and implanted valve size was obtained with transtoracic and TEE (κ= 0.88 and 0.76). CONCLUSIONS: The aortic annulus measurements obtained by TTE, TEE, and angiography correlated well, while tomography correlated poorly with other techniques. The imaging techniques that showed the best agreement between estimated aortic annulus size and implanted aortic valve size were TTE and TEE.