Cusp overlap method for self-expanding transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

BACKGROUND: Conduction disturbances and the need for permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation remains a common complication for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), particularly when self-expanding (SE) valves are used. AIMS: We compared in-hospital and 30-day rates of new PPM implantation between patients undergoing TAVR with SE valves using the conventional three-cusp coplanar implantation technique and the cusp-overlap technique. METHODS: We retrospectively compared patients without a pre-existing PPM who underwent a TAVR procedure with SE Evolut R or PRO valves using the cusp-overlap technique from July 2018 to September 2020 (n = 519) to patients who underwent TAVR using standard three-cusp technique from April 2016 to March 2017 (n = 128) in two high volume Canadian centers. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in baseline RBBB between the groups (10.4% vs. 13.2; p = 0.35). The rate of in-hospital new complete heart block (9.4% vs. 23.4%; p ≤ 0.001) and PPM implantation (8% vs. 21%; p ≤ 0.001) were significantly reduced when using the cusp-overlap technique. The incidence of new LBBB (30.4% vs. 29%; p = 0.73) was similar. At 30 days, the rates of new complete heart block (11% vs. 23%; p ≤ 0.001) and PPM implantation (10% vs. 21%, p ≤ 0.001) remained significantly lower in the cusp-overlap group, while the rate of new LBBB (35% vs. 30%; p = 0.73) was similar. CONCLUSION: Cusp-overlap approach offers several potential technical advantages compared to standard three-cusp view, and may result in lower PPM rates in TAVR with SE Evolut valve.

Overview of Contemporary Chronic Total Occlusion Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Techniques: A Narrative Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Despite the abundance of coronary chronic total occlusions (CTO) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) studies, the literature is not easy to digest for both general PCI operators and CTO PCI specialists because of the many varied terms used for approaches and inconsistency in terminology. This inconsistency makes it challenging to understand the advantages and disadvantages of these different approaches and, most importantly, their downstream clinical outcomes. Accordingly, we conducted a systematic review of all published studies on CTO PCI to describe techniques and algorithms used in the last decade to provide an overview on the efficacy and safety of contemporary CTO PCI techniques. METHODS: We performed a comprehensive search of the PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane library databases for manuscripts about PCI of CTOs. We included studies published between the years 2005 and 2019. We categorized studies into those using a single approach (antegrade, retrograde) and those with a prespecified algorithm (ie, hybrid approach). RESULTS: Fifty-five observational studies including 28,907 patients who underwent CTO were included in this review. CTO PCI generally carries low risk of major procedural complications, with angiographic success rates being higher in studies that used an algorithmic vs single technical approach. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review highlights the wide variation in definitions and practices in CTO PCI and calls for standardization in terminology and practice.

CONTEXTE: Malgré l'abondance d'études sur l'intervention coronarienne percutanée (ICP) en cas d'occlusion totale chronique (OTC), la littérature n'est pas facile à assimiler, tant pour les opérateurs généraux qui effectuent des ICP que pour les spécialistes des ICP en cas d'OTC, en raison des nombreux termes utilisés pour les approches et de l'incohérence sur le plan de la terminologie. Cette incohérence rend difficile la compréhension des avantages et des inconvénients de ces différentes approches et, surtout, de leurs résultats cliniques en aval. Nous avons donc procédé à une revue systématique de toutes les études publiées sur l'ICP en cas d'OTC afin de décrire les techniques et les algorithmes utilisés au cours de la dernière décennie et de donner un aperçu de l'efficacité et de l'innocuité des techniques contemporaines d'ICP en cas d'OTC. MÉTHODOLOGIE: Nous avons effectué une recherche exhaustive dans les bases de données PubMed, EMBASE et Cochrane Library pour trouver des articles sur l'ICP en cas d'OTC. Nous avons retenu les études publiées entre 2005 et 2019. Nous avons classé ces études en deux catégories : celles qui utilisent une seule approche (antérograde, rétrograde) et celles qui utilisent un algorithme prédéfini (approche hybride). RÉSULTATS: Cette revue portait sur 55 études observationnelles, pour un total de 28 907 patients présentant des OTC. L'ICP en cas d'OTC comporte généralement un faible risque de complications importantes liées aux interventions, les taux de réussite angiographique étant plus élevés pour les études où une approche algorithmique était utilisée que pour celles où l'on recourait à une approche technique unique. CONCLUSIONS: Cette revue systématique souligne la grande variation des définitions et des pratiques en matière d'ICP en cas d'OTC, ainsi que le besoin d'une normalisation de la terminologie et de la pratique.

Association of Clinical and Economic Outcomes With Permanent Pacemaker Implantation After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

Importance: The literature is inconsistent regarding the impact of permanent pacemaker implantation after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Objective: To evaluate clinical and economic outcomes in patients who required permanent pacemaker implantation during the index hospitalization after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective, population-based cohort study using data from a multicenter registry included patients who underwent a transcatheter aortic valve replacement procedure from April 1, 2010, to March 31, 2015, in Ontario, Canada, with follow-up to March 31, 2017. Patients who had a previously implanted permanent pacemaker or who died during the index hospitalization were excluded. Inverse probability of treatment weighting using the propensity score was used to adjust for baseline differences between the pacemaker and nonpacemaker groups. Exposures: Patients received a permanent pacemaker during the index hospitalization after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Main Outcomes and Measures: All-cause mortality, readmission, readmission for heart failure, emergency department visits, and cumulative 1-year health care costs. Results: The study cohort consisted of 1263 patients (mean [SD] age, 82.3 [7.2] years; 595 [47.1%] female; 137 [10.8%] rural), of whom 186 (14.7%) required permanent pacemaker insertion during the index hospitalization after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Mean follow-up was 990 days. After propensity score weighting, over the entire follow-up period, pacemaker implantation was associated with significantly higher all-cause mortality (43.9% vs 31.7%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.40; 95% CI, 1.01-1.94; P = .04), all-cause readmission (80.9% vs 70.6%; HR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.15-1.43; P < .001), and emergency department visits (95.5% vs 87.3%; HR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.08-1.52; P = .004). Pacemaker implantation was also associated with significantly greater readmission for heart failure (33.9% vs 19.1%; HR, 1.90; 95% CI, 1.53-2.36; P < .001). There were no statistically significant differences between groups in adjusted cumulative health care costs 1 year after discharge. Conclusions and Relevance: New permanent pacemaker implantation after transcatheter aortic valve replacement was associated with significantly greater morbidity and mortality at long-term follow-up. However, this did not translate to a difference in cumulative health care costs after hospital discharge.