Conduction Abnormalities and Permanent Pacemaker Implantation After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Using the Repositionable LOTUS Device: The United Kingdom Experience.

OBJECTIVES: The authors report the incidence of pacemaker implantation up to hospital discharge and the factors influencing pacing rate following implantation of the LOTUS bioprosthesis (Boston Scientific, Natick, Massachusetts) in the United Kingdom. BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is associated with a significant need for permanent pacemaker implantation. Pacing rates vary according to the device used. The REPRISE II (Repositionable Percutaneous Replacement of Stenotic Aortic Valve Through Implantation of Lotus Valve System) trial reported a pacing rate of 29% at 30 days after implantation of the LOTUS device. METHODS: Data were collected retrospectively on 228 patients who had the LOTUS device implanted between March 2013 and February 2015 across 10 centers in the United Kingdom. Twenty-seven patients (12%) had pacemakers implanted pre-procedure and were excluded from the analysis. RESULTS: Patients were aged 81.2 ± 7.7 years; 50.7% were male. The mean pre-procedural QRS duration was 101.7 ± 20.4 ms. More than one-half of the cohort (n = 111, 55%) developed new left bundle branch block (LBBB) following the procedure. Permanent pacemakers were implanted in 64 patients (32%) with a median time to insertion of 3.0 ± 3.4 days. Chief indications for pacing were atrioventricular (AV) block (n = 46, 72%), or LBBB with 1st degree AV block (n = 11, 17%). Amongst those who received a pacemaker following TAVR the pre-procedural electrocardiogram findings included: No conduction disturbance (n = 41, 64%); 1st degree AV block (n = 10, 16%); right bundle branch block (n = 6, 9%) and LBBB (n = 5, 8%). LBBB (but not permanent pacemaker) occurred more frequently in patients who had balloon aortic valvuloplasty before TAVR (odds ratio [OR]: 1.25; p = 0.03). Pre-procedural conduction abnormality (composite of 1st degree AV block, hemiblock, right bundle branch block, LBBB) was independently associated with the need for permanent pacemaker (OR: 2.54; p = 0.048). The absence of aortic valve calcification was also associated with a higher pacing rate (OR: 0.55; p = 0.031). Multivariate regression analysis did not show an independent association between depth of implant, valve oversizing, balloon post-dilatation, and the need for pacing post-procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Following implantation of the repositionable LOTUS valve, 55% of patients developed LBBB and 32% of patients required a pacemaker during their index hospital admission. Patients with pre-procedural conduction disturbance and non-calcified aortic valves were more likely to need pacing. No other anatomic features were identified with increased pacing requirement with the LOTUS device.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Using the Repositionable LOTUS Valve: United Kingdom Experience.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to present the U.K. experience to date with the second-generation LOTUS bioprosthesis (Boston Scientific, Natick, Massachusetts). BACKGROUND: First-generation transcatheter aortic valves have limitations. Second-generation repositionable valves may improve on some of those limitations. METHODS: Prospectively collected data relating to procedural and in-hospital outcome was analyzed from 10 implantation centers in the United Kingdom. RESULTS: Implants in 228 patients age 81.4 ± 7.6 years were studied; 53.5% were male. Mean logistic EuroScore was 17.5 ± 12.4. One hundred eighty-seven (82.0%) were undertaken for aortic stenosis, 7 (3.1%) for aortic regurgitation, and 34 (14.9%) for mixed aortic valve disease. A total of 67.1% of cases were done under local anesthetic and/or sedation with transfemoral access in 94.7% and transaortic in 5.3%. Three device sizes were used: 23 mm (n = 66, 28.9%), 25 mm (n = 39, 17.1%), and 27 mm (n = 123, 53.9%). The valve was successfully deployed in 99.1% of procedures. After implantation, the mean aortic gradient was 11.4 ± 5.4 mm Hg and aortic valve area 1.6 ± 0.5 cm(2). In-hospital mortality was 1.8% (n = 4). Complications included cardiac tamponade (1.8%), conversion to sternotomy (1.3%), stroke (3.9%), vascular access-related (7.0%), and acute kidney injury (7.9%). The incidence of moderate/severe aortic regurgitation was 0.8% (n = 2). A total of 31.8% of patients required new permanent pacemaker implantation. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis represents the largest published series on use of the LOTUS valve. Outcomes using this valve are excellent. In-hospital mortality is very low. Complication rates are low, and the LOTUS valve improves on first-generation valves, particularly with regard to residual aortic regurgitation.

Computed tomography of a broken heart: chronic left ventricular pseudoaneurysm.

The multislice cardiac computed tomography (CT) images of a 77-year-old man with a history of coronary artery bypass grafting and subsequent large left ventricular pseudoaneurysm (LVPA) formation are presented. Survival, as in this case, for several years after pseudoaneurysm formation is unusual without operative intervention. The case highlights the utility of CT in this scenario in allowing accurate assessment of LVPA anatomy, as well as noninvasive assessment of graft vessel patentcy, both vital to surgical planning in such high-risk cases.