Yield of the electrophysiological study in patients with new-onset left bundle branch block after transcathether aortic valve replacement: The PR interval matters.
HV interval
PR interval
atrioventricular block (AV block)
electrophysiological study (EPS)
trans-catheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR)
Journal
Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine
ISSN: 2297-055X
Titre abrégé: Front Cardiovasc Med
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101653388
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2022
2022
Historique:
received:
01
04
2022
accepted:
08
08
2022
entrez:
23
9
2022
pubmed:
24
9
2022
medline:
24
9
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Studies suggest that performing an electrophysiological study (EPS) may be useful to identify patients with new-onset left bundle branch block (LBBB) post-TAVR at risk of atrioventricular block. However, tools to optimize the yield of such strategy are needed. We therefore aimed to investigate whether 12-lead ECG changes post-TAVR may help identify patients with abnormal EPS findings. Consecutive patients with new-onset LBBB post-TAVR who underwent EPS were included. PR and QRS intervals were measured on 12-lead ECG pre-TAVR and during EPS. Abnormal EPS was defined as an HV interval > 55 ms. Among 61 patients, 28 (46%) had an HV interval > 55 ms after TAVR. Post-TAVR PR interval and ΔPR (PR-post-pre-TAVR) were significantly longer in patients with prolonged HV (PR: 188 ± 38 vs. 228 ± 34 ms, PR interval assessment may be useful to select patients with new-onset LBBB after TAVR who may benefit most from an EPS. In patients with PR ≤ 200 ms
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
Studies suggest that performing an electrophysiological study (EPS) may be useful to identify patients with new-onset left bundle branch block (LBBB) post-TAVR at risk of atrioventricular block. However, tools to optimize the yield of such strategy are needed. We therefore aimed to investigate whether 12-lead ECG changes post-TAVR may help identify patients with abnormal EPS findings.
Materials and methods
UNASSIGNED
Consecutive patients with new-onset LBBB post-TAVR who underwent EPS were included. PR and QRS intervals were measured on 12-lead ECG pre-TAVR and during EPS. Abnormal EPS was defined as an HV interval > 55 ms.
Results
UNASSIGNED
Among 61 patients, 28 (46%) had an HV interval > 55 ms after TAVR. Post-TAVR PR interval and ΔPR (PR-post-pre-TAVR) were significantly longer in patients with prolonged HV (PR: 188 ± 38 vs. 228 ± 34 ms,
Conclusion
UNASSIGNED
PR interval assessment may be useful to select patients with new-onset LBBB after TAVR who may benefit most from an EPS. In patients with PR ≤ 200 ms
Identifiants
pubmed: 36148076
doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2022.910693
pmc: PMC9485718
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
910693Commentaires et corrections
Type : ErratumIn
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 Pagnoni, Meier, Luca, Fournier, Aminfar, Gentil, Haddad, Domenichini, Lebloa, Herrera-Siklody, Cook, Goy, Roguelov, Girod, Rubimbura, Dupré, Eeckhout, Pruvot, Muller and Pascale.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Références
N Engl J Med. 2019 Aug 15;381(7):685
pubmed: 31412190
Eur Heart J. 2017 Sep 21;38(36):2739-2791
pubmed: 28886619
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015 Feb 10;65(5):437-48
pubmed: 25660921
J Electrocardiol. 2020 Mar - Apr;59:68-73
pubmed: 32007908
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2018 Aug 13;11(15):1509-1518
pubmed: 30093055
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019 Aug 27;74(8):1086-1106
pubmed: 31439219
BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2012 Oct 04;12:87
pubmed: 23035864
Eur Heart J. 2021 Sep 14;42(35):3427-3520
pubmed: 34455430
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2018 Aug 13;11(15):1519-1526
pubmed: 30093056
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016 Jun 27;9(12):1269-1276
pubmed: 27339844
Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2017 Jul - Aug;18(5S1):S10-S13
pubmed: 28377313
Am J Cardiol. 2018 Jun 1;121(11):1351-1357
pubmed: 29598854
Circulation. 1973 May;47(5):1133-4
pubmed: 4705576
Europace. 2016 Jan;18(1):131-7
pubmed: 26060209
Heart Rhythm. 2015 Feb;12(2):321-9
pubmed: 25446155
Arrhythm Electrophysiol Rev. 2020 Jun 3;9(1):20-27
pubmed: 32637116
J Am Heart Assoc. 2020 Mar 3;9(5):e014446
pubmed: 32089049
Circulation. 2009 Mar 17;119(10):e235-40
pubmed: 19228822
J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2017 Mar;48(2):121-130
pubmed: 27987072
Am J Cardiol. 2020 Mar 1;125(5):795-802
pubmed: 31889524
Int J Cardiol. 2017 Jun 1;236:216-220
pubmed: 28237734