4.6 Article

Transcatheter Valve SELECTion in Patients With Right Bundle Branch Block and Impact on Pacemaker Implantations

Journal

JACC-CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS
Volume 12, Issue 18, Pages 1781-1793

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2019.05.055

Keywords

ACURATE neo; permanent pacemaker implantations; right bundle branch block; SAPIEN 3; transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVES This study sought to evaluate the impact of the ACURATE neo (NEO) (Boston Scientific, Marlborough, Massachusetts) versus SAPIEN 3 (S3) (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, California) on permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) in patients with pre-existing right bundle branch block (RBBB) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. BACKGROUND Pre-existing RBBB is the strongest patient-related predictor for PPI after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. No comparison of newer-generation transcatheter heart valves with regard to PPI in these patients exists. METHODS This multicenter registry includes 4,305 patients; 296 (6.9%) had pre-existent RBBB and no pacemaker at baseline and formed the study population. The primary endpoint was new PPI at 30 days. The association of NEO versus S3 with PPI was assessed using binary logistic regression analyses and inverse probability treatment weighting in a propensity-matched population. RESULTS The 30-day PPI rate was 39.2%. The S3 and NEO were used in 66.9% and 33.1%, respectively. The NEO was associated with lower rates of PPI compared with the S3 (29.6% vs. 43.9%; p = 0.025; odds ratio [OR]: 0.54; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.32 to 0.89; p = 0.018), after multivariable adjustment (OR: 0.48; 95% CI: 0.26 to 0.86; p = 0.014), and in the inverse probability treatment weighting analysis (OR: 0.37; 95% CI: 0.25 to 0.55; p < 0.001). There was no difference in device failure (8.2% vs. 6.6%; p = 0.792) or in-hospital course. In the propensity-matched population, PPI rate was also lower in the NEO versus S3 (23.1% vs. 44.6%; p = 0.016; OR: 0.37; 95% CI: 0.17 to 0.78; p = 0.010), with no difference in device failure (9.2% vs. 6.2%; p = 0.742). CONCLUSIONS In patients with RBBB, risk of PPI was significantly lower with the NEO compared with the S3, suggesting the possibility of a patient tailored transcatheter heart valve therapy. (C) 2019 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available