OBJECTIVES: The occurrence of new conduction abnormalities necessitating permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) is a complication of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Previous studies have shown inconsistent results about the clinical impact of new PPI after TAVR. METHODS: CONDUCT was a prospective observational registry that enrolled 295 patients undergoing TAVR at four European centres. The primary goal of this registry was to compare 1-year clinical outcomes in TAVR patients with or without PPI, using one-to-four propensity score matched (PSM) analysis. It also assessed major adverse cardiac events (MACE) in patients undergoing right ventricular pacing after PPI. RESULTS: Out of 160 PSM patients, 36 underwent PPI and the other 124 had no PPI within 30 days post-TAVR. The median age of the patients was 80 years, with more men (80.6% and 84.7% in patients with and without PPI, respectively) and similar EuroSCORE II and Society of Thoracic Surgeons scores. Patients with PPI had higher diabetes prevalence (p=0.055) and lower left ventricular ejection fraction percentages (p=0.034), but higher systolic pulmonary artery pressure (p=0.013) than those without PPI. However, these differences diminished after PSM. At 1 year, PPI patients had a nonsignificant but slightly higher incidence of MACE (22.2% versus 13.7%; p=0.216) (HR 1.63; 95% CI [0.72-3.71]) driven by increased heart failure (11.1% versus 2.4%; p=0.046) (HR 5.05; 95% CI [1.09-23.4]). Freedom from all-cause mortality, cardiovascular death, stroke and endocarditis at 1-year follow-up was comparable between groups. CONCLUSION: Despite a higher incidence of congestive heart failure rehospitalisation in patients undergoing PPI, 1-year clinical outcomes were similar in both groups.

Department of Cardiology and Angiology University Hospital Tübingen Tübingen Germany

Department of Cardiology Linköping University Hospital Linköping Sweden

Edwards Lifesciences Prague Czech Republic

General and Interventional Cardiology Angiology Heart and Diabetes Centre Ruhr University Bad Oeynhausen Germany

Heart Center Academic Medical Center University of Amsterdam Amsterdam the Netherlands

Institute for Pharmacology and Preventive Medicine Cloppenburg Germany

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Smith CR, Leon MB, Mack MJ et al. Transcatheter versus surgical aortic-valve replacement in high-risk patients. N Engl J Med. 2011;364:2187–98. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1103510. PubMed DOI

Mack MJ, Leon MB, Thourani VH et al. Transcatheter aortic-valve replacement with a balloon-expandable valve in low-risk patients. N Engl J Med. 2019;380:1695–705. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1814052. PubMed DOI

Seeger J, Gonska B, Rottbauer W, Wöhrle J. New generation devices for transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement are superior compared with last generation devices with respect to VARC-2 outcome. Cardiovasc Interv Ther. 2018;33:247–55. doi: 10.1007/s12928-017-0477-6. PubMed DOI

Shivaraju A, Michel J, Frangieh AH et al. Transcatheter aortic and mitral valve-in-valve implantation using the Edwards Sapien 3 heart valve. J Am Heart Assoc. 2018;7:e007767. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.117.007767. PubMed DOI PMC

Nazif TM, Dizon JM, Hahn RT et al. Predictors and clinical outcomes of permanent pacemaker implantation after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: the PARTNER (Placement of AoRtic TraNscathetER Valves) trial and registry. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;8:60–9. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2014.07.022. PubMed DOI

Biancari F, Pykäri J, Savontaus M et al. Early and late pacemaker implantation after transcatheter and surgical aortic valve replacement. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2021;97:E560–8. doi: 10.1002/ccd.29177. PubMed DOI

Cao C, Ang SC, Indraratna P et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus surgical aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis. Ann Cardiothorac Surg. 2013;2:10–23. doi: 10.3978/j.issn.2225-319X.2012.11.09. PubMed DOI PMC

Maeno Y, Abramowitz Y, Kawamori H et al. A highly predictive risk model for pacemaker implantation after TAVR. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2017;10:1139–47. doi: 10.1016/j.jcmg.2016.11.020. PubMed DOI

Agasthi P, Ashraf H, Pujari SH et al. Prediction of permanent pacemaker implantation after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: the role of machine learning. World J Cardiol. 2023;15:95–105. doi: 10.4330/wjc.v15.i3.95. PubMed DOI PMC

Rudolph T, Droppa M, Baan J et al. Modifiable risk factors for permanent pacemaker after transcatheter aortic valve implantation: CONDUCT registry. Open Heart. 2023;10:e002191. doi: 10.1136/openhrt-2022-002191. PubMed DOI PMC

Rück A, Saleh N, Glaser N. Outcomes following permanent pacemaker implantation after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: SWEDEHEART observational study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2021;14:2173–81. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2021.07.043. PubMed DOI

Faroux L, Chen S, Muntané-Carol G et al. Clinical impact of conduction disturbances in transcatheter aortic valve replacement recipients: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Eur Heart J. 2020;41:2771–81. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehz924. PubMed DOI

Jørgensen TH, De Backer O, Gerds TA et al. Mortality and heart failure hospitalization in patients with conduction abnormalities after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019;12:52–61. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2018.10.053. PubMed DOI

Auffret V, Boulmier D, Didier R et al. Clinical effects of permanent pacemaker implantation after transcatheter aortic valve implantation: insights from the Nationwide France-TAVI registry. Arch Cardiovasc Dis. 2024;117:213–23. doi: 10.1016/j.acvd.2023.12.011. PubMed DOI

Sweeney MO, Hellkamp AS, Ellenbogen KA et al. Adverse effect of ventricular pacing on heart failure and atrial fibrillation among patients with normal baseline QRS duration in a clinical trial of pacemaker therapy for sinus node dysfunction. Circulation. 2003;107:2932–7. doi: 10.1161/01.CIR.0000072769.17295.B1. PubMed DOI

Tops LF, Schalij MJ, Bax JJ. The effects of right ventricular apical pacing on ventricular function and dyssynchrony implications for therapy. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;54:764–76. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2009.06.006. PubMed DOI

Droppa M, Rudolph TK, Baan J et al. Risk factors for permanent pacemaker implantation in patients receiving a balloon-expandable transcatheter aortic valve prosthesis. Heart Vessels. 2020;35:1735–45. doi: 10.1007/s00380-020-01653-6. PubMed DOI

Lee MY, Yeshwant SC, Chava S, Lustgarten DL. Mechanisms of heart block after transcatheter aortic valve replacement – cardiac anatomy, clinical predictors and mechanical factors that contribute to permanent pacemaker implantation. Arrhythm Electrophysiol Rev. 2015;4:81–5. doi: 10.15420/AER.2015.04.02.81. PubMed DOI PMC

Koneru JN, Jones PW, Hammill EF et al. Risk factors and temporal trends of complications associated with transvenous implantable cardiac defibrillator leads. J Am Heart Assoc. 2018;7:e007691. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.117.007691. PubMed DOI PMC

Scheetz SD, Upadhyay GA. Physiologic pacing targeting the His bundle and left bundle branch: a review of the literature. Curr Cardiol Rep. 2022;24:959–78. doi: 10.1007/s11886-022-01723-3. PubMed DOI

Hochstadt A, Merdler I, Meridor Y et al. Effect of pacemaker implantation after transcatheter aortic valve replacement on long- and mid-term mortality. Heart Rhythm. 2021;18:199–206. doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2020.10.013. PubMed DOI

Regueiro A, Abdul-Jawad Altisent O, Del Trigo M et al. Impact of new-onset left bundle branch block and periprocedural permanent pacemaker implantation on clinical outcomes in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;9:e003635. doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.115.003635. PubMed DOI