Valve-Related Complications in TAVI Leading to Emergent Cardiac Surgery.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is now a standard procedure for the treatment of symptomatic aortic valve stenosis in many patients. In Germany, according to the annual reports from the German Institute for Quality Assurance and Transparency in Healthcare (Institut für Qualitätssicherung und Transparenz im Gesundheitswesen), the rate of serious intraprocedural complications, such as valve malpositioning or embolization, coronary obstruction, aortic dissection, annular rupture, pericardial tamponade, or severe aortic regurgitation requiring emergency cardiac surgery has decreased markedly in recent years from more than 5.5% in 2012 to 2.0% in 2019. However, with increased use, the total number of adverse events remains about 500 per year, about 100 of which require conversion to sternotomy. These, sometimes, fatal events can occur at any time and are still challenging. Therefore, the interdisciplinary TAVI heart team should be prepared and aware of possible rescue strategies.

Leadless Pacing: Current State and Future Direction.

Leadless pacing is now an established alternative to conventional pacing with subcutaneous pocket and transvenous lead for patients with class I or II single-chamber pacing indication. Available 12-month follow-up data shows a 48% fewer major complication rate in patients with Micra™ compared to a historical control group in a nonrandomized study [1]. There is one system with Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval and two with the Communauté Européenne (CE) mark. The OPS code for the implantation is 8-83d.3 and the procedure has recently been rated as a "new Examination and Treatment Method (NUB)" in the German DRG system, meaning adequate reimbursement is negotiable with health insurance providers. The systems offer similar generator longevity and programming possibilities as conventional pacemaker systems, including rate response, remote monitoring, and MRI safety. The biggest downsides to date are limitations to single-chamber stimulation, lack of long-time data, and concerns of handling of the system at the end of its life span. However, implant procedure complication rates and procedure times do not exceed conventional pacemaker operations, and proper training and patient selection is provided.