Cargando…

Non-invasive predictors for infranodal conduction delay in patients with left bundle branch block after TAVR

AIMS: Left bundle branch block (LBBB) is the most common conduction disorder after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with an increased risk of atrioventricular (AV) block. The aim of the current study was to identify non-invasive predictors for infranodal conduction delay in patients wit...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Auberson, Chloé, Badertscher, Patrick, Madaffari, Antonio, Malushi, Meriton, Bourquin, Luc, Spies, Florian, Aeschbacher, Stefanie, Fahrni, Gregor, Kaiser, Christoph, Jeger, Raban, Osswald, Stefan, Sticherling, Christian, Knecht, Sven, Kühne, Michael
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8639549/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34448041
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00392-021-01924-w
_version_ 1784609173046034432
author Auberson, Chloé
Badertscher, Patrick
Madaffari, Antonio
Malushi, Meriton
Bourquin, Luc
Spies, Florian
Aeschbacher, Stefanie
Fahrni, Gregor
Kaiser, Christoph
Jeger, Raban
Osswald, Stefan
Sticherling, Christian
Knecht, Sven
Kühne, Michael
author_facet Auberson, Chloé
Badertscher, Patrick
Madaffari, Antonio
Malushi, Meriton
Bourquin, Luc
Spies, Florian
Aeschbacher, Stefanie
Fahrni, Gregor
Kaiser, Christoph
Jeger, Raban
Osswald, Stefan
Sticherling, Christian
Knecht, Sven
Kühne, Michael
author_sort Auberson, Chloé
collection PubMed
description AIMS: Left bundle branch block (LBBB) is the most common conduction disorder after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with an increased risk of atrioventricular (AV) block. The aim of the current study was to identify non-invasive predictors for infranodal conduction delay in patients with LBBB. METHODS: We analyzed consecutive patients undergoing TAVR with pre-existing or new-onset LBBB between August 2014 and August 2020. His ventricular (HV) interval measurement was performed on day 1 after TAVR. Baseline, procedural, as well as surface and intracardiac electrocardiographic parameters were included. Infranodal conduction delay was defined as HV interval > 55 ms. RESULTS: Of 825 patients screened after TAVR, 151 patients (82 ± 6 years, 39% male) with LBBB were included. Among these, infranodal conduction delay was observed in 25%. ΔPR (difference in PR interval after and before TAVR), PR and QRS duration after TAVR were significantly longer in the group with HV prolongation. In a multivariate analysis in patients with sinus rhythm (n = 123), ΔPR (OR per 10 ms increase: 1.52; 95%CI: 1.19–2.01; p = 0.002) was the only independent factor associated with infranodal conduction delay. A change in PR interval by 20 ms yielded a specificity of 83% and a sensitivity of 46%, with a negative predictive value of 84% and a positive predictive value of 45% to predict HV prolongation. CONCLUSIONS: Simple analysis of surface ECG and a calculated ΔPR < 20 ms can be used as predictor for the absence of infranodal conduction delay in post-TAVR patients with LBBB. GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT: [Image: see text] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00392-021-01924-w.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8639549
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-86395492021-12-03 Non-invasive predictors for infranodal conduction delay in patients with left bundle branch block after TAVR Auberson, Chloé Badertscher, Patrick Madaffari, Antonio Malushi, Meriton Bourquin, Luc Spies, Florian Aeschbacher, Stefanie Fahrni, Gregor Kaiser, Christoph Jeger, Raban Osswald, Stefan Sticherling, Christian Knecht, Sven Kühne, Michael Clin Res Cardiol Original Paper AIMS: Left bundle branch block (LBBB) is the most common conduction disorder after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with an increased risk of atrioventricular (AV) block. The aim of the current study was to identify non-invasive predictors for infranodal conduction delay in patients with LBBB. METHODS: We analyzed consecutive patients undergoing TAVR with pre-existing or new-onset LBBB between August 2014 and August 2020. His ventricular (HV) interval measurement was performed on day 1 after TAVR. Baseline, procedural, as well as surface and intracardiac electrocardiographic parameters were included. Infranodal conduction delay was defined as HV interval > 55 ms. RESULTS: Of 825 patients screened after TAVR, 151 patients (82 ± 6 years, 39% male) with LBBB were included. Among these, infranodal conduction delay was observed in 25%. ΔPR (difference in PR interval after and before TAVR), PR and QRS duration after TAVR were significantly longer in the group with HV prolongation. In a multivariate analysis in patients with sinus rhythm (n = 123), ΔPR (OR per 10 ms increase: 1.52; 95%CI: 1.19–2.01; p = 0.002) was the only independent factor associated with infranodal conduction delay. A change in PR interval by 20 ms yielded a specificity of 83% and a sensitivity of 46%, with a negative predictive value of 84% and a positive predictive value of 45% to predict HV prolongation. CONCLUSIONS: Simple analysis of surface ECG and a calculated ΔPR < 20 ms can be used as predictor for the absence of infranodal conduction delay in post-TAVR patients with LBBB. GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT: [Image: see text] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00392-021-01924-w. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021-08-26 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC8639549/ /pubmed/34448041 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00392-021-01924-w Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Paper
Auberson, Chloé
Badertscher, Patrick
Madaffari, Antonio
Malushi, Meriton
Bourquin, Luc
Spies, Florian
Aeschbacher, Stefanie
Fahrni, Gregor
Kaiser, Christoph
Jeger, Raban
Osswald, Stefan
Sticherling, Christian
Knecht, Sven
Kühne, Michael
Non-invasive predictors for infranodal conduction delay in patients with left bundle branch block after TAVR
title Non-invasive predictors for infranodal conduction delay in patients with left bundle branch block after TAVR
title_full Non-invasive predictors for infranodal conduction delay in patients with left bundle branch block after TAVR
title_fullStr Non-invasive predictors for infranodal conduction delay in patients with left bundle branch block after TAVR
title_full_unstemmed Non-invasive predictors for infranodal conduction delay in patients with left bundle branch block after TAVR
title_short Non-invasive predictors for infranodal conduction delay in patients with left bundle branch block after TAVR
title_sort non-invasive predictors for infranodal conduction delay in patients with left bundle branch block after tavr
topic Original Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8639549/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34448041
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00392-021-01924-w
work_keys_str_mv AT aubersonchloe noninvasivepredictorsforinfranodalconductiondelayinpatientswithleftbundlebranchblockaftertavr
AT badertscherpatrick noninvasivepredictorsforinfranodalconductiondelayinpatientswithleftbundlebranchblockaftertavr
AT madaffariantonio noninvasivepredictorsforinfranodalconductiondelayinpatientswithleftbundlebranchblockaftertavr
AT malushimeriton noninvasivepredictorsforinfranodalconductiondelayinpatientswithleftbundlebranchblockaftertavr
AT bourquinluc noninvasivepredictorsforinfranodalconductiondelayinpatientswithleftbundlebranchblockaftertavr
AT spiesflorian noninvasivepredictorsforinfranodalconductiondelayinpatientswithleftbundlebranchblockaftertavr
AT aeschbacherstefanie noninvasivepredictorsforinfranodalconductiondelayinpatientswithleftbundlebranchblockaftertavr
AT fahrnigregor noninvasivepredictorsforinfranodalconductiondelayinpatientswithleftbundlebranchblockaftertavr
AT kaiserchristoph noninvasivepredictorsforinfranodalconductiondelayinpatientswithleftbundlebranchblockaftertavr
AT jegerraban noninvasivepredictorsforinfranodalconductiondelayinpatientswithleftbundlebranchblockaftertavr
AT osswaldstefan noninvasivepredictorsforinfranodalconductiondelayinpatientswithleftbundlebranchblockaftertavr
AT sticherlingchristian noninvasivepredictorsforinfranodalconductiondelayinpatientswithleftbundlebranchblockaftertavr
AT knechtsven noninvasivepredictorsforinfranodalconductiondelayinpatientswithleftbundlebranchblockaftertavr
AT kuhnemichael noninvasivepredictorsforinfranodalconductiondelayinpatientswithleftbundlebranchblockaftertavr