Cargando…
Reduction of permanent pacemaker implantation by using the cusp overlap technique in transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a meta-analysis
BACKGROUND: The need for permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation is a common complication after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Deep implantation position is a risk factor for PPM implantation. Thus, in the field of self-expandable (SE) transcatheter heart valves (THV) cusp overlap pro...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10160159/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36656375 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00392-022-02150-8 |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: The need for permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation is a common complication after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Deep implantation position is a risk factor for PPM implantation. Thus, in the field of self-expandable (SE) transcatheter heart valves (THV) cusp overlap projection (COP) technique was implemented to reduce parallax, allowing a more precise guidance of implantation depth. AIMS: This meta-analysis aims to report the outcome of patients undergoing TAVR with SE THV using COP versus conventional implantation technique (CIT). METHODS: Systematical search in MEDLINE and EMBASE yielded five observational controlled studies comparing both implantation techniques for the SE Evolut prosthesis (Medtronic Intern. Ltd., CA, USA) and fulfilling the inclusion criteria for meta-analysis. RESULTS: Totally, 1227 patients were included, comprising 641 who underwent COP and 586 CIT TAVR. Incidence of post-procedural need for PPM implantation was significantly lower in COP group (9.8% vs 20.6%; OR = 0.43; p < 0.00001). This was accompanied by significantly higher implantation position in COP group (mean difference distance from distal end of the intraventricular portion of the THV to the non-coronary cusp (NCC): − 1.03 mm; p = 0.00001). Incidence of new-onset left bundle branch block did not differ. Regarding procedural and 30-day mortality, technical success, post-procedural aortic regurgitation, and rates of multiple device implantation, no difference between COP and CIT was found. CONCLUSION: COP is an effective and safe implantation technique to reduce the need for a permanent pacemaker implantation during TAVR with SE Evolut prosthesis. GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT: [Image: see text] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00392-022-02150-8. |
---|