Department of Cardiology, University Hospital Basel, Petersgraben 4, 4031 Basel, Switzerland.
Cardiovascular Research Institute Basel, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Europace. 2022 Jul 21;24(7):1179-1185. doi: 10.1093/europace/euac027.
Conduction disorders such as left bundle branch block (LBBB) are common after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Consensus regarding a reasonable strategy to manage conduction disturbances after TAVI has been elusive. The European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) conducted a survey to capture contemporary clinical practice for conduction disorders after TAVI. A 25-item online questionnaire was developed and distributed among the EHRA electrophysiology (EP) research network centres. Of 117 respondents, 44% were affiliated with university hospitals. A standardized management protocol for advanced conduction disorders such as LBBB or atrioventricular block (AVB) after TAVI was available in 63% of participating centres. Telemetry after TAVI was chosen as the most frequent management strategy for patients with new-onset or pre-existing LBBB (79% and 70%, respectively). Duration of telemetry in patients with new-onset LBBB varied, with a 48-h period being the most frequently chosen, but almost half monitoring continued for at least 72 h. Similarly, in patients undergoing EP study due to new-onset LBBB, the HV interval cut-off point leading to pacemaker implantation was heterogeneous among European centres, although an HV >75 ms threshold was the most common. Conduction system pacing was chosen as a preferred approach by 3.7% of respondents for patients with LBBB and normal left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), and by 5.6% for patients with LBBB and reduced LVEF. This survey suggests some heterogenity in the management of conduction disorders after TAVI across European centres. The risk stratification strategies vary substantially. Conduction system pacing in patients with LBBB after TAVI is still underused.
传导障碍,如左束支传导阻滞(LBBB),在经导管主动脉瓣植入(TAVI)后很常见。对于 TAVI 后管理传导障碍的合理策略,尚未达成共识。欧洲心律协会(EHRA)进行了一项调查,以了解 TAVI 后传导障碍的当代临床实践。开发了一个包含 25 个项目的在线问卷,并分发给 EHRA 电生理(EP)研究网络中心。在 117 名应答者中,44%的人隶属于大学医院。在参与中心中,有 63%的中心提供了针对 TAVI 后高级传导障碍(如 LBBB 或房室传导阻滞(AVB))的标准化管理方案。TAVI 后进行遥测是治疗新发或原有 LBBB 患者的最常见管理策略(分别为 79%和 70%)。对于新发 LBBB 患者,遥测的持续时间不同,选择 48 小时的情况最为常见,但近一半的监测时间至少持续 72 小时。同样,在因新发 LBBB 而接受 EP 研究的患者中,尽管 HV >75ms 是最常见的,但导致起搏器植入的 HV 间隔截断点在欧洲中心之间存在异质性。对于 LBBB 和正常左心室射血分数(LVEF)的患者,有 3.7%的应答者选择作为首选方法的房室结起搏,对于 LBBB 和左心室射血分数降低的患者,有 5.6%的应答者选择作为首选方法的房室结起搏。这项调查表明,欧洲中心之间在 TAVI 后管理传导障碍方面存在一定的异质性。风险分层策略差异很大。TAVI 后 LBBB 患者的心脏传导系统起搏仍未得到充分利用。