ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Transvenous permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation is an available option for Fontan patients with sinus node dysfunction. However, the thrombogenic potential of leads within the Fontan baffle is unknown. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the clot burden in Fontan patients with a transvenous atrial PPM to those without a PPM and those with an epicardial PPM. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of all transvenous PPM implantations in Fontan patients followed at our institution (2000-2018). We performed frequency matching on Fontan type and age group. Primary outcome was identification of intracardiac clot, pulmonary embolus, or embolic stroke. RESULTS: Of 1920 Fontan patients, 58 patients (median age 23 years; interquartile range [25th-75th percentiles] 14-33) at the time of transvenous PPM implantation and 174 matched subjects formed our cohort. The type of Fontan performed in case subjects was right atrium-pulmonary artery or right atrium-right ventricle conduit (54%), lateral tunnel (43%), and extracardiac (3%). The cumulative incidence of clot was highest in patients with transvenous PPM, followed by patients with epicardial PPM and no PPM (1.2 vs 0.87 vs 0.67 per 100 person-years of follow-up, respectively). In multivariable analysis, anticoagulation and/or antiplatelet therapy were protective against clot and resulted in reduction of clot risk by 3-fold (incidence rate ratio 0.33; 95% confidence interval 0.21-0.53; P <.001). CONCLUSION: In a large cohort of Fontan patients matched for age and Fontan type, patients with transvenous PPM had a higher but not statistically significant incidence of clot compared to those with no PPM and epicardial PPM. Patients treated with warfarin/aspirin had lower clot risk.
Subject(s)
Cardiac Pacing, Artificial/methods , Fontan Procedure , Sick Sinus Syndrome/therapy , Thrombosis/etiology , Adolescent , Adult , Anticoagulants/administration & dosage , Female , Humans , Male , Retrospective Studies , Thrombosis/prevention & controlABSTRACT
The Publisher regrets that this article is an accidental duplication of an article that has already been published, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccas.2020.05.023>. The duplicate article has therefore been withdrawn. The full Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal can be found at https://www.elsevier.com/about/our-business/policies/article-withdrawal.
