Management of conduction disorders after transcatheter aortic valve implantation: results of the EHRA survey.
Aortic Valve
Aortic Valve Stenosis
/ surgery
Arrhythmias, Cardiac
/ diagnosis
Bundle-Branch Block
/ diagnosis
Cardiac Conduction System Disease
/ diagnosis
Heart Valve Prosthesis
Humans
Pacemaker, Artificial
Stroke Volume
Surveys and Questionnaires
Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement
/ adverse effects
Treatment Outcome
Ventricular Function, Left
Bradyarrhythmia
Complication
Conduction disorders
EHRA survey
Permanent pacemaker
Remote monitoring
Transcatheter aortic valve replacement
Journal
Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology
ISSN: 1532-2092
Titre abrégé: Europace
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100883649
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
21 07 2022
21 07 2022
Historique:
received:
01
02
2022
accepted:
16
02
2022
pubmed:
30
3
2022
medline:
26
7
2022
entrez:
29
3
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Conduction disorders such as left bundle branch block (LBBB) are common after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Consensus regarding a reasonable strategy to manage conduction disturbances after TAVI has been elusive. The European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) conducted a survey to capture contemporary clinical practice for conduction disorders after TAVI. A 25-item online questionnaire was developed and distributed among the EHRA electrophysiology (EP) research network centres. Of 117 respondents, 44% were affiliated with university hospitals. A standardized management protocol for advanced conduction disorders such as LBBB or atrioventricular block (AVB) after TAVI was available in 63% of participating centres. Telemetry after TAVI was chosen as the most frequent management strategy for patients with new-onset or pre-existing LBBB (79% and 70%, respectively). Duration of telemetry in patients with new-onset LBBB varied, with a 48-h period being the most frequently chosen, but almost half monitoring continued for at least 72 h. Similarly, in patients undergoing EP study due to new-onset LBBB, the HV interval cut-off point leading to pacemaker implantation was heterogeneous among European centres, although an HV >75 ms threshold was the most common. Conduction system pacing was chosen as a preferred approach by 3.7% of respondents for patients with LBBB and normal left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), and by 5.6% for patients with LBBB and reduced LVEF. This survey suggests some heterogenity in the management of conduction disorders after TAVI across European centres. The risk stratification strategies vary substantially. Conduction system pacing in patients with LBBB after TAVI is still underused.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35348646
pii: 6554408
doi: 10.1093/europace/euac027
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1179-1185Informations de copyright
Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2022. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.