Evaluation of Conduction Disorders after Aortic Valve Replacement with Rapid Deployment Bioprostheses

2018 ◽  
Vol 13 (5) ◽  
pp. 356-360
Author(s):  
Augusto D'Onofrio ◽  
Lorenzo Bagozzi ◽  
Chiara Tessari ◽  
Annalisa Francescato ◽  
Giorgia Cibin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Left Bundle Branch Block ◽  
Pacemaker Implantation ◽  
Bundle Branch Block ◽  
End Point ◽  
Conduction Disorders ◽  
Single Center Study ◽  
Bundle Branch Blocks ◽  
Qrs Duration ◽  
Rapid Deployment ◽  
New Onset

Objective The aim of this retrospective, single-center study was to evaluate the occurrence of conduction disorders after rapid deployment aortic bioprosthesis implantation. Methods Electrocardiograms of patients undergoing INTUITY (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA USA) bioprosthesis implantation were collected at admission, during postoperative course, and at discharge. Primary end point was the occurrence of new-onset conduction disorders, defined as complete left bundle branch block, complete right bundle branch block, permanent pacemaker implantation, and worsening of pre-existing rhythm abnormalities. Secondary end points were the assessment of preoperative and postoperative QRS duration and the identification of transitory conduction disorders. Results Forty-four patients (July 2015–December 2016) were included in the analysis. Preoperatively, patients with normal conduction and with already existing disorders were 25 (56.8%) and 19 (43.2%), respectively. Primary end point occurred in 14 patients (31.8%). Two patients (4.5%) received pacemaker implantation. In patients with normal preoperative conduction, new abnormalities were found in eight cases (32%): all left bundle branch blocks with one pacemaker implantation. Worsening of pre-existing conduction disorders was found in six patients (31.6%) with one pacemaker implantation. QRS duration increased in 20 patients (45.4%), and average increase was 37 milliseconds. Overall, we observed a significant increase of QRS (96 ± 21 milliseconds vs. 111 ± 28 milliseconds, P < 0.001). Three patients experienced a new-onset temporary left bundle branch block. Conclusions New-onset conduction disorders or worsening of pre-existing rhythm abnormalities occur in one third of patients after rapid deployment aortic bioprosthesis implantation. Although the incidence of postoperative pacemaker implantation before discharge is low, strict follow-up is mandatory to identify a potential need for pacemaker implantation in a timely manner.

P2630Incidence and prognostic impact of new-onset left bundle branch block in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
S L Kristensen ◽  
R Roerth ◽  
P S Jhund ◽  
S Beggs ◽  
L Kober ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Left Bundle Branch Block ◽  
Bundle Branch Block ◽  
Reduced Ejection Fraction ◽  
Patients With Heart Failure ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Qrs Duration ◽  
New Onset

Abstract Background Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) improves survival in patients with heart failure, reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and left bundle branch block (LBBB). However, little is known about the incidence of LBBB in HFrEF and the risk factors for developing this. We addressed these questions in the PARADIGM-HF and ATMOSPHERE trials. Methods We identified 7703 patients with a non-paced rhythm on their baseline ECG, a QRS<130 ms, and at least one follow-up ECG (done at annual visits and end of study). Patients were stratified by baseline QRS duration (≤100 ms - reference; 101–115 ms and 116–129 ms) and followed until development of QRS duration ≥130 ms with a LBBB configuration or latest available ECG. The crude LBBB incidence rate per 100 person-years (py) was identified in the three QRS duration subgroups. Additionally, we examined risk of the primary composite outcome of cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization, and all-cause mortality, in patients with incident LBBB vs. no incident LBBB. Results Overall, 313 of 7703 patients (4%) developed LBBB during a mean follow-up of 2.7 years, yielding an incidence rate of 1.5 per 100 py. The rate ranged from 0.9 in those with QRS ≤100 ms to 4.0 per 100 py in patients with QRS 116–129 ms. Other predictors of incident LBBB included male sex, age, lower LVEF, HF duration and absence of AF. The risk of the primary composite endpoint was higher among those who developed incident LBBB vs no incident LBBB; event rates 13.5 vs 10.0 per 100 py, yielding an adjusted HR of 1.43 (1.05–1.96). For all-cause mortality the corresponding rates were 12.6 vs 7.3 per 100 py; HR 1.55 (1.16–2.07) (Table 1). Table 1. Risk of outcomes according to incident LBBB during follow-up No. events Crude rate per 100py Adjusted* HR (95% CI) HF hospitalization or CV death   No incident LBBB 2145 10.0 (9.6–10.4) 1.00 (ref.)   Incident LBBB 43 13.5 (10.0–18.2) 1.43 (1.05–1.96) All-cause mortality   No incident LBBB 1662 7.3 (6.9–7.6) 1.00 (ref.)   Incident LBBB 48 12.6 (9.5–16.7) 1.55 (1.16–2.07) Conclusion Among patients with HFrEF, the annual incidence of new-onset LBBB (and a potential indication for CRT), was around 1.5%, ranging from 1% in those with QRS duration below 100 ms to 4% in those with QRS 116–129 ms. Incident LBBB was associated with a much higher risk of adverse outcomes, highlighting the importance of repeat ECG monitoring in patients with HFrEF. Acknowledgement/Funding Novartis

scholarly journals 607 Comparison of incidence and predictors of new left bundle branch block and permanent pacemaker implantation in a large multicentre contemporary TAVI registry using the Evolut R/pro system vs. the accurate neo valve

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (Supplement_G) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessandro Sticchi ◽  
Francesco Gallo ◽  
Vincenzo De Marzo ◽  
Kim Won-keun ◽  
Arif A Khokhar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Left Bundle Branch Block ◽  
Heart Valves ◽  
New Left ◽  
Pacemaker Implantation ◽  
Multivariate Regression Analysis ◽  
Permanent Pacemaker ◽  
Bundle Branch Block ◽  
Permanent Pacemaker Implantation ◽  
Conduction Disorders ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Aims Conduction disorders and permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) continue to be an important issue in patients who undergo transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). The aim of this study was to investigate the incidence and clinical outcomes of new left bundle branch block (LBBB) and PPI after TAVI in a comparison between two self-expandable supra-annular transcatheter valves. Methods and results We report the data from an international, retrospective registry including 3862 consecutive patients who underwent TAVI with two self-expanding transcatheter heart valves (Medtronic Evolut R/PRO and Boston ACURATE neo). Patients with pre-existing left or right bundle branch block, any atrioventricular blocks or previous pacemaker implantation were excluded. Finally, we performed a propensity score matched analysis (PSM) to match the patients and overcome pre-procedural differences reaching 427 couples. New-onset Left Bundle Branch Block (LBBB) occurred with a rate of 13.1% (56/427) in the ACURATE group and 18.7% (80/427) in the Evolut group (P = 0.031). The incidence of new permanent pacemaker implantation was 16.4% (70/427) in the Evolut group and 6.8% (29/427) in the ACURATE group, respectively (P &lt; 0.001). In the multivariate regression analysis, we found the valve recapture [odds ratio (OR): 4.66, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.08–23.75, P = 0.042] as significant predictors for LBBB, and male sex (OR: 1.59, CI: 1.03–2.46, P = 0.036), ACURATE valve (OR: 0.34, CI: 0.20–0.57, P &lt; 0.001) and post-procedure LBBB (OR: 4.38, CI: 2.78–6.85, P &lt; 0.001) for PPI. Conclusions In our large multi-centre contemporary cohort of patients, new LBBB and PPI occurred more frequently in patients following TAVI with Evolut R/PRO vs. ACURATE valve. However, the choice of the valve seemed to influence only the rate of pacemaker implantation and not the incidence of new LBBB. Further data is required to clarify the impact of valve design on conduction abnormalities.

P309Aortic valve implantation-induced bundle branch block as a framework towards a more uniform electrocardiographic definition of left bundle branch block

EP Europace ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
S Calle ◽  
M Coeman ◽  
T Philipsen ◽  
P Kayaert ◽  
P Gheeraert ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Left Bundle Branch Block ◽  
Systolic Function ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Peak Time ◽  
Bundle Branch Block ◽  
Qrs Duration ◽  
Valve Implantation ◽  
New Onset

Abstract INTRODUCTION The electrocardiographic (ECG) pattern of true left bundle branch block (LBBB) has not been fully clarified and various definitions of LBBB exist. New-onset LBBB after transcatheter (TAVR) or surgical (SAVR) aortic valve replacement implies a proximal pathogenesis of LBBB and thus may provide a reference to characterize and define true LBBB. PURPOSE This study compares ECG characteristics in aortic valve implantation-induced LBBB (AVI-LBBB) to a non-procedural-induced LBBB control group (co-LBBB) in order to set a more homogenous definition for true LBBB. METHODS The study enrolled all patients with new-onset TAVR- and SAVR-induced LBBB between 2013 and 2019. AVI-LBBB was defined as new-onset persistent LBBB occurring within 24h after TAVR or SAVR. Patients were matched for age, sex, ischemic heart disease and left ventricular systolic function to randomly selected co-LBBB patients in a 1:2 ratio. For inclusion in both groups, a non-strict LBBB definition was used (QRSD ≥120ms, QS or rS in lead V1, absence of Q wave in leads V5-6). ECG characteristics were digitally analysed by the MUSE algorithm and confirmed by two experts. All ECG recordings were classified according to 4 different LBBB definitions: MADIT, European Society of Cardiology (ESC), Strauss and American Heart Association (AHA). RESULTS 59 patients with AVI-LBBB (34 TAVR, 25 SAVR, median age 82 years, 42% male) were compared to 118 matched co-LBBB patients. All patients with AVI-LBBB presented with QRS notching/slurring in the lateral leads, whereas this was present in only 85% of the co-LBBB group (p = 0.001). QRS duration (148ms vs 145ms, p = 0.074) and R wave peak time (58ms vs 62ms, p = 0.065) were not significantly different among both groups. AVI-LBBB was characterized by a more rightward QRS axis (-15° vs -30°, p = 0.013). When comparing AVI-LBBB to LBBB controls with QRS notching/slurring, a comparable QRS axis was observed. Almost all AVI-LBBB patients met the MADIT (98%), ESC (100%) and Strauss (95%) definition. Only 18% of patients met the AHA definition, because of the low combined presence of QRS notching/slurring in all 4 lateral leads (54%) and because only 27% of patients had an R wave peak time &gt;60ms in both leads V5-6. In the co-LBBB group, adherence to the different definitions was significantly lower compared to the AVI-LBBB group: MADIT 86% (p = 0.007), ESC 85% (p = 0.001), Strauss 68% (p &lt; 0.001) and AHA 7% (p = 0.035). Lower presence of lateral notching/slurring and more patients with smaller QRS duration (QRS duration ≥130ms, 86% vs 98%, p = 0.007) in the co-LBBB group explain these results. CONCLUSIONS Discordance exists between various definitions in scoring AVI-LBBB. Our data show that presence of QRS notching/slurring in the lateral leads is a crucial feature of proximal LBBB, rather than QRS duration and R wave peak time. The AVI-LBBB population provides a framework towards a more uniform definition and criteria for assessing true, proximal LBBB.

scholarly journals Associations between left bundle branch block with different PR intervals, QRS durations, heart rates and the risk of heart failure: a register-based cohort study using ECG data from the primary care setting

Open Heart ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. e001425
Author(s):  
Marc Meller Søndergaard ◽  
Johannes Riis ◽  
Karoline Willum Bodker ◽  
Steen Møller Hansen ◽  
Jesper Nielsen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Heart Rate ◽  
Left Bundle Branch Block ◽  
Bundle Branch Block ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Pr Interval ◽  
Qrs Duration ◽  
The Impact

AimLeft bundle branch block (LBBB) is associated with an increased risk of heart failure (HF). We assessed the impact of common ECG parameters on this association using large-scale data.Methods and resultsUsing ECGs recorded in a large primary care population from 2001 to 2011, we identified HF-naive patients with a first-time LBBB ECG. We obtained information on sex, age, emigration, medication, diseases and death from Danish registries. We investigated the association between the PR interval, QRS duration, and heart rate and the risk of HF over a 2-year follow-up period using Cox regression analysis.Of 2471 included patients with LBBB, 464 (18.8%) developed HF during follow-up. A significant interaction was found between QRS duration and heart rate (p<0.01), and the analyses were stratified on these parameters. Using a QRS duration <150 ms and a heart rate <70 beats per minute (bpm) as the reference, all groups were statistically significantly associated with the development of HF. Patients with a QRS duration ≥150 ms and heart rate ≥70 bpm had the highest risk of developing HF (HR 3.17 (95% CI 2.41 to 4.18, p<0.001). There was no association between the PR interval and HF after adjustment.ConclusionProlonged QRS duration and higher heart rate were associated with increased risk of HF among primary care patients with LBBB, while no association was observed with PR interval. Patients with LBBB with both a prolonged QRS duration (≥150 ms) and higher heart rate (≥70 bpm) have the highest risk of developing HF.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document