4.1 Article

Incidence and predictors of moderate to severe tricuspid regurgitation after dual-chamber pacemaker implantation

Journal

PACE-PACING AND CLINICAL ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY
Volume 42, Issue 1, Pages 85-92

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/pace.13543

Keywords

atrial fibrillation; pacemaker; tricuspid regurgitation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Introduction The incidence and predictors of tricuspid regurgitation (TR) after permanent pacemaker (PM) implantations have not been well evaluated. We attempted to determine TR's natural course and predictors, especially focusing on the influence of atrial fibrillation (AF). Methods Data from 530 patients with dual-chamber PMs were evaluated. The main study outcomes were moderate to severe TR and isolated TR (moderate to severe TR without other structural heart diseases [SHDs]) in follow-up echocardiography. Results Over a median follow-up period of 7.6 years, moderate to severe TR developed in 14.5% patients. Of those, concomitant SHD was observed in 51.9% of patients, and 48.1% presented with isolated TR. A multivariable analysis identified the independent predictors of moderate to severe TR (diabetes mellitus [DM], chronic lung disease, preexisting mild TR, peripheral artery disease, moderate to severe aortic regurgitation, and persistent AF [PeAF]) and isolated TR (DM, preexisting mild TR, and PeAF). PeAF (n = 67, 12.6%) was an independent predictor of both moderate to severe TR (hazard ratio [HR] 2.59, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.22-5.51) and isolated TR (HR 4.54, 95% CI: 1.60-12.90). The patients with PeAF exhibited a higher incidence of moderate to severe TR (21.8% vs 12.9% vs 11.6% PeAF, paroxysmal AF, and without AF, respectively) and isolated TR (18.6% vs 6.6% vs 4.2%, respectively) during the follow-up. Conclusion Moderate to severe TR after PM implantations developed with or without the influence of concomitant SHD. Patients with PeAF exhibited a higher risk of moderate to severe TR after PM implantations.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available