Israel Medical Association Journal

Background: Cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) with endocardial leads crossing the tricuspid valve can lead to or worsen tricuspid regurgitation (TR), causing substantial morbidity and mortality. Despite a recent randomized controlled study revealing a low short-term incidence of device-related TR (DRT) post-CIED implantation, uncertainties persist regarding the efficacy of intra-procedural 2-dimensional transthoracic echocardiography (2DTTE) in preventing long-term TR.

Objectives: To conduct a long-term follow-up study on patients with CIED implants based on a previous study conducted at our hospital.

Methods: In a retrospective study at Assuta Ashdod Medical Center (2018–2019), patients undergoing de-novo CIED implantation with (n=39, group 1) or without (n=51, group 2) intra-procedural 2DTTE were analyzed. Clinical, demographic, and long-term (> 1 year) echocardiographic data were collected and compared.

Results: The study included 90 patients (mean age 72.3 ± 11.0 years, 63% male, 23% ICD, 50% active leads, follow-up 32.8 ± 11 months). TR aggravation was found in 25% of patients (13 in group 1, 10 in group 2), with no statistical difference between groups. Multivariate analysis identified a history of atrial fibrillation (AF) as the sole significant factor in long-term TR deterioration (OR=3.44, 95%CI 1.13–10.43, P = 0.029). Other clinical, demographic, echocardiographic, and device-related factors did not significantly contribute to long-term DRT.

Conclusions: After one-year post-CIED implantation, the incidence of DRT significantly increases. Intra-procedural 2DTTE does not effectively reduce long-term DRT, suggesting that implantation-related mechanisms are less likely the primary cause. AF likely plays a major role in the pathogenesis of long-term TR in this subset post-CIED implantation.

Background: Patients with right bundle branch block (RBBB) prior to transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) are at high risk for immediate post-procedural heart block and long-term mortality when discharged without a pacemaker.

Objectives: To test whether prophylactic permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) is beneficial.

Methods: Of 795 consecutive patients who underwent TAVI, 90 patients had baseline RBBB. We compared characteristics and outcomes of the prophylactic PPI with post-TAVI PPI. Need for pacing was defined as  greater than 1% ventricular pacing.

Results: Forty patients with RBBB received a prophylactic PPI (group 1), and in 50 the decision was based on standard post-procedural indications (group 2). There were no significant differences in clinical baseline characteristics. One patient developed a tamponade after a PPI post-TAVI. A trend toward shorter hospitalization duration in group 1 patients was observed (P = 0.06). On long-term follow-up of 848 ± 56 days, no differences were found in overall survival (P = 0.77), the composite event-free survival of both mortality and hospitalizations (P = 0.66), or mortality and syncope (P = 0.65). On multivariate analysis, independent predictors of the need for pacing included baseline PR interval increase of 10ms (odds ratio [OR] 1.21 per 10 ms increment 95% confidence interval [95%CI] 1.02–1.44, P = 0.028), and the use of new generation valves (OR 3.92, 95%CI 1.23–12.46, P = 0.023).

Conclusions: In patients with baseline pre-TAVI RBBB, no outcome differences were found with prophylactic PPI. On multivariate analysis, predictors of the need for pacing included baseline long PR interval, and the use of newer generation valves.