Author + information
- Received August 13, 2018
- Revision received October 25, 2018
- Accepted October 30, 2018
- Published online January 7, 2019.
- Troels H. Jørgensen, MDa,∗ (, )
- Ole De Backer, MD, PhDa,
- Thomas A. Gerds, DrRerNatb,
- Gintautas Bieliauskas, MDa,
- Jesper H. Svendsen, MD, DMSca,c and
- Lars Søndergaard, MD, DMSca,c
- aDepartment of Cardiology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
- bSection of Biostatistics, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
- cDepartment of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
- ↵∗Address for correspondence:
Dr. Troels H. Jørgensen, Rigshospitalet, The Heart Centre, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark.
Objectives The aim of this study was to assess mortality and rehospitalization in patients with new bundle branch block (BBB) and/or permanent pacemaker (PPM) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).
Background Previous studies have provided inconsistent results on the clinical impact of new BBB or new PPM after TAVR.
Methods A total of 816 consecutive patients without pre-procedural BBB or PPM undergoing TAVR between 2007 and 2017 were followed for 5 years or until data extraction in September 2017. Data on vital status and hospitalization were obtained through national registries.
Results Within 30 days post-TAVR, new BBB without PPM and new PPM occurred in 247 (30.3%) and 132 (16.2%) patients, respectively, leaving 437 patients (53.6%) without conduction abnormalities. Median follow-up was 2.5 years (interquartile range: 1.0 to 4.9 years). One-year all-cause mortality was increased for new BBB (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.80; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.18 to 3.67) but not for new PPM (HR: 1.64; 95% CI: 0.72 to 3.74) compared with patients with no conduction abnormalities. The risk for late all-cause mortality (≥1 year after TAVR) was higher both for patients with new BBB (HR: 1.79; 95% CI: 1.24 to 2.59) and for those with new PPM (HR: 1.58; 95% CI: 1.01 to 2.46) compared with patients with no conduction abnormalities. Patients with new BBB (HR: 1.47; 95% CI: 1.02 to 2.12) and new PPM (HR: 1.66; 95% CI: 1.09 to 2.54) had a higher risk for heart failure hospitalization and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (p < 0.0001 for both groups) during follow-up.
Conclusions New BBB and new PPM developed frequently after TAVR. New BBB was associated with increased early and late all-cause mortality, whereas new PPM was associated with late all-cause mortality. Furthermore, both new BBB and new PPM increased the risk for heart failure hospitalizations.
Dr. Jørgensen has received a research grant from Edwards Lifesciences. Dr. Sondergaard has received consulting fees and institutional research grants from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, and Symetis. Dr. Svendsen is on the advisory board of Medtronic; has received speaking fees from Medtronic and Biotronik; and has received an institutional research grant from Medtronic, Biotronik, and Gilead. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose.
- Received August 13, 2018.
- Revision received October 25, 2018.
- Accepted October 30, 2018.
- 2019 American College of Cardiology Foundation
This article requires a subscription or purchase to view the full text. If you are a subscriber or member, click Login or the Subscribe link (top menu above) to access this article.