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

Clinical Research in Cardiology - Tập 110 - Trang 1967-1976 - 2021
Chloé Auberson1, Patrick Badertscher1, Antonio Madaffari1, Meriton Malushi1, Luc Bourquin1, Florian Spies1, Stefanie Aeschbacher1, Gregor Fahrni1, Christoph Kaiser1, Raban Jeger1, Stefan Osswald1, Christian Sticherling1, Sven Knecht1, Michael Kühne1
1Division of Cardiology, University of Basel Hospital, Basel, Switzerland

Tóm tắt

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. 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. 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. 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.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Rodés-Cabau J, Ellenbogen KA, Krahn AD et al (2019) Management of conduction disturbances associated with transcatheter aortic valve replacement: JACC Scientific Expert Panel. J Am Coll Cardiol 74:1086–1106 Leon MB, Smith CR, Mack MJ et al (2016) Transcatheter or surgical aortic-valve replacement in intermediate-risk patients. N Engl J Med 374:1609–1620 Leon MB, Smith CR, Mack M et al (2010) Transcatheter aortic-valve implantation for aortic stenosis in patients who cannot undergo surgery. N Engl J Med 363:1597–1607 Reiter C, Lambert T, Kellermair J et al (2021) Intraprocedural dynamics of cardiac conduction during transcatheter aortic valve implantation—assessment by simultaneous electrophysiology testing. Hear Rhythm 8:419–425 Nazif TM, Chen S, George I et al (2019) New-onset left bundle branch block after transcatheter aortic valve replacement is associated with adverse long-term clinical outcomes in intermediate-risk patients: an analysis from the PARTNER II trial. Eur Heart J 40:2218–2227 Auffret V, Puri R, Urena M et al (2017) Conduction disturbances after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: current status and future perspectives. Circulation 136:1049–1069 Judson GL, Agrawal H, Mahadevan VS (2019) Conduction system abnormalities after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: mechanism, prediction, and management. Interv Cardiol Clin 8:403–409 Urena M, Mok M, Serra V et al (2012) Predictive factors and long-term clinical consequences of persistent left bundle branch block following transcatheter aortic valve implantation with a balloon-expandable valve. J Am Coll Cardiol 60:1743–1752 Regueiro A, Abdul-Jawad Altisent O, Del Trigo M et al (2016) Impact of new-onset left bundle branch block and periprocedural permanent pacemaker implantation on clinical outcomes in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Circ Cardiovasc Interv 9:e003635 Lilly SM, Deshmukh AJ, Epstein AE et al (2020) 2020 ACC expert consensus decision pathway on management of conduction disturbances in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement. J Am Coll Cardiol 76:2391–2411 Tovia-Brodie O, Ben-Haim Y, Joffe E et al (2017) The value of electrophysiologic study in decision-making regarding the need for pacemaker implantation after TAVI. J Interv Card Electrophysiol 48:121–130 Makki N, Dollery J, Jones D, Crestanello J, Lilly S (2017) Conduction disturbances after TAVR: electrophysiological studies and pacemaker dependency. Cardiovasc Revascularization Med 18:S10–S13 Knecht S, Schaer B, Reichlin T et al (2020) Electrophysiology testing to stratify patients with left bundle branch block after transcatheter aortic valve implantation. J Am Heart Assoc 9:e014446 Jastrzębski M, Kukla P, Kisiel R, Fijorek K, Moskal P, Czarnecka D (2018) Comparison of four LBBB definitions for predicting mortality in patients receiving cardiac resynchronization therapy. Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol 23:e12563 Youden WJ (1950) Index for rating diagnostic tests. Cancer 3:32–35 Lin SI, Miura M, Tagliari AP et al (2020) Intraventricular conduction disturbances after transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Interv Cardiol 15:e11 Scheinman MM, Peters RW, Suavé MJ et al (1982) Value of the H-Q interval in patients with bundle branch block and the role of prophylactic permanent pacing. Am J Cardio 50:1316–1322 Rivard L, Schram G, Asgar A et al (2015) Electrocardiographic and electrophysiological predictors of atrioventricular block after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Heart Rhythm 12:321–329 Mirolo A, Viart G, Durand E et al (2018) Pacemaker memory in post-TAVI patients: who should benefit from permanent pacemaker implantation? PACE Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 41:1178–1184 Akin I, Kische S, Paranskaya L et al (2012) Predictive factors for pacemaker requirement after transcatheter aortic valve implantation. BMC Cardiovasc Disord 12:87 Badenco N, Chong-Nguyen C, Maupain C et al (2017) Respective role of surface electrocardiogram and His bundle recordings to assess the risk of atrioventricular block after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Int J Cardiol 236:216–220 Rogers T, Devraj M, Thomaides A et al (2018) Utility of invasive electrophysiology studies in patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Am J Cardiol 121:1351–1357 Coeman M, Kayaert P, Philipsen T et al (2020) Different dynamics of new-onset electrocardiographic changes after balloon- and self-expandable transcatheter aortic valve replacement: implications for prolonged heart rhythm monitoring. J Electrocardiol 59:68–73 Mangieri A, Lanzillo G, Bertoldi L et al (2018) Predictors of advanced conduction disturbances requiring a late (≥48 H) permanent pacemaker following transcatheter aortic valve replacement. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 11:1519–1526