Permanent pacemaker implantation following aortic valve replacement: current prevalence and clinical predictors.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of conduction disease requiring permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation following aortic valve replacement (AVR) ranges from 3% to 6%. Data concerning the potential risks for PPM requirement associated with certain valve types have been conflicting and controversial. We sought to evaluate the prevalence, predictors for PPM implantation, and PPM dependency during follow-up in patients undergoing AVR. METHODS: A total of 214 consecutive patients undergoing AVR were studied retrospectively. A total of 207 patients were included in the statistical analysis. Clinical variables including valve size and types were catalogued and the incidence of PPM evaluated. Cardiac rhythm device clinic records were examined and PPM dependency status was catalogued. Multivariate analyses were performed to determine predictors of PPM implantation and PPM dependency during follow-up. RESULTS: Fifteen patients (7.2%) required PPM postoperatively. After controlling for clinical and surgical characteristics, predictors for PPM included preoperative first-degree atrioventricular block with and without left anterior fascicular block or intraventricular conduction delay [odd ratios (OR) = 12.5, P = 0.001], cardiac arrest postoperatively (OR = 9.4, P = 0.012), and combined aortic and mitral valve surgery (OR = 11.5, P = 0.027). Aortic valve types did not predict complete heart block (CHB) and PPM implantation. Of those patients who underwent PPM implantation, 70% were classified as PPM dependent during long-term follow-up. CONCLUSION: CHB and PPM implantation continue to be common complications of AVR. Preexisting atrioventricular with intrafascicular or intraventricular conduction disease along with cardiac arrest and dual valve surgery are the most important significant predictors of PPM implantation and PPM dependency during follow-up. The selection of valve types did not predict conduction disease requiring PPM implantation.

Carotid artery stenting in a community hospital: a success story.

BACKGROUND: Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is an effective procedure for reducing the risk of stroke in patients with carotid artery atherosclerosis. The evolution of carotid artery stenting (CAS) has made this a viable alternative to CEA in appropriate patient populations. We sought to evaluate the safety and efficacy of CAS in a high-risk population, in an effort to report such results in a medium-size community hospital. The data were then compared with the results published in the CREST and SAPPHIRE trials. METHODS: The records of 280 consecutive patients undergoing carotid artery stenting between January 2005 and December 2011 were reviewed. A total of 271 patients were included in the final analysis. The clinical endpoints included cerebrovascular accident, myocardial infarction, and death in the perioperative period. RESULTS: A total of 155 men (57.2%) and 116 women (42.8%) underwent CAS. A total of 259 carotid interventions (95.6%) were successful. Two of 271 patients (0.7%) experienced a minor neurologic event post procedure, with 1 patient death (0.35%) recorded. No perioperative myocardial infarctions were encountered. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that our institution has been able to safely and effectively introduce and carry out CAS as a substitute to CEA in patients that are at high risk for surgery with results comparable to those published in large-scale clinical trials. Further studies are needed to verify whether these results can be generalized to other community hospitals, as well as to refine qualification criteria for performing physicians. Furthermore, the applicability of these results to normal-risk patients is currently being investigated.

Effectiveness of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators for the primary prevention of sudden cardiac death in women with advanced heart failure: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Numerous clinical trials have established a role for implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in the prevention of sudden cardiac death in patients with heart failure. However, questions remain that regard the clinical benefit of these therapies in different patient subgroups. Specifically, the role of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in women with heart failure for the primary prevention of sudden cardiac death has not been well established. Our objective is to determine whether implantable cardioverter-defibrillators reduce mortality in women with advanced heart failure. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE (1950-2008), EMBASE (1988-2008, week 24), the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (third quarter, 2008), the National Institute of Health ClinicalTrials.gov database, the Food and Drug Administration Web site, and various reports presented at scientific meetings (1994-2007). Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials of implantable cardioverter/defibrillators for the primary prevention of sudden cardiac death in patients with heart failure that reported all-cause mortality as an outcome for the female population. Of the 2619 reports identified, 5 trials that enroll 934 women were included in the meta-analysis. RESULTS: Pooled data from the 5 trials revealed no statistically significant decrease in all-cause mortality in women with heart failure who receive implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% confidence interval, 0.76-1.33). CONCLUSIONS: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy for the primary prevention of sudden cardiac death in women does not reduce all-cause mortality. Further studies are needed to investigate the reasons for this ob servation and to define the population of women who may benefit most from implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy.