4.6 Article

Management of conduction disorders after transcatheter aortic valve implantation: results of the EHRA survey

Journal

EUROPACE
Volume -, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/europace/euac027

Keywords

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement; Bradyarrhythmia; Conduction disorders; Remote monitoring; Permanent pacemaker; Complication; EHRA survey

Ask authors/readers for more resources

There is heterogeneity in the management of conduction disorders after TAVI across European centres, with varying risk stratification strategies and underuse of conduction system pacing in patients with LBBB after TAVI.
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.

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