RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine the impact of new-onset persistent left bundle branch block (NOP-LBBB) on late outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). BACKGROUND: The impact of NOP-LBBB after TAVI remains controversial. METHODS: A total of 668 consecutive patients who underwent TAVI with a balloon-expandable valve without pre-existing LBBB or permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) were included. Electrocardiograms were obtained at baseline, immediately after the procedure, and daily until hospital discharge. Patients were followed at 1, 6, and 12 months and yearly thereafter. RESULTS: New-onset LBBB occurred in 128 patients (19.2%) immediately after TAVI and persisted at hospital discharge in 79 patients (11.8%). At a median follow-up of 13 months (range 3 to 27 months), there were no differences in mortality rate between the NOP-LBBB and no NOP-LBBB groups (27.8% vs. 28.4%; adjusted-hazard ratio: 0.87 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.55 to 1.37]; p = 0.54). There were no differences between groups regarding cardiovascular mortality (p = 0.82), sudden death (p = 0.87), rehospitalizations for all causes (p = 0.11), or heart failure (p = 0.55). NOP-LBBB was the only factor associated with an increased rate of PPI during the follow-up period (13.9% vs. 3.0%; hazard ratio: 4.29 [95% CI: 2.03 to 9.07], p < 0.001. NOP-LBBB was also associated with a lack of left ventricular ejection fraction improvement and poorer New York Heart Association functional class at follow-up (p < 0.02 for both). CONCLUSIONS: NOP-LBBB occurred in â¼1 of 10 patients who had undergone TAVI with a balloon-expandable valve. NOP-LBBB was associated with a higher rate of PPI, a lack of improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction, and a poorer functional status, but did not increase the risk of global or cardiovascular mortality or rehospitalizations at 1-year follow-up.
Asunto(s)
Estenosis de la Válvula Aórtica/terapia , Bloqueo de Rama/etiología , Cateterismo Cardíaco/efectos adversos , Cateterismo Cardíaco/instrumentación , Implantación de Prótesis de Válvulas Cardíacas/efectos adversos , Implantación de Prótesis de Válvulas Cardíacas/instrumentación , Prótesis Valvulares Cardíacas , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Estenosis de la Válvula Aórtica/diagnóstico , Estenosis de la Válvula Aórtica/mortalidad , Estenosis de la Válvula Aórtica/fisiopatología , Valvuloplastia con Balón , Bloqueo de Rama/diagnóstico , Bloqueo de Rama/mortalidad , Bloqueo de Rama/fisiopatología , Bloqueo de Rama/terapia , Canadá , Cateterismo Cardíaco/mortalidad , Estimulación Cardíaca Artificial , Femenino , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/etiología , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/fisiopatología , Implantación de Prótesis de Válvulas Cardíacas/mortalidad , Hemodinámica , Humanos , Masculino , Marcapaso Artificial , Readmisión del Paciente , Diseño de Prótesis , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Riesgo , España , Volumen Sistólico , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Función Ventricular IzquierdaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and multivessel disease, guidelines recommend infarct-related artery (IRA) only intervention during primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) except in patients with hemodynamic instability. To assess the available evidence, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing outcomes of non-IRA PCI as an adjunct to primary PCI (same sitting PCI [SS-PCI]) with IRA only PCI (IRA-PCI) in the setting of STEMI. METHODS AND RESULTS: A comprehensive search identified 14 studies [11 cohort, 3 randomized controlled trials] comprising of 35,239 patients. For cohort studies, patients undergoing SS-PCI had higher rate of anterior infarction (48% vs. 45%, P = .04) and cardiogenic shock (11% vs. 9%, P = .0001) at baseline compared with IRA-PCI. The primary composite end point of death, myocardial infarction and revascularization was higher in the SS-PCI group in the short term (OR, 1.63; CI, 1.12-2.37) and long term (OR, 1.60; CI, 1.18-2.16). However, after excluding patients with shock, there was no difference in primary endpoint for the short (OR, 1.33; CI, 0.67-2.63) and long term (OR, 1.39; CI, 0.80-2.42) follow-up. In analyses limited to randomized controlled trials, primary end point was similar during short term (OR, 0.79; CI, 0.19-3.28) and significantly lower for SS-PCI group in the long term (OR, 0.55; CI, 0.34-0.91). CONCLUSIONS: There is paucity of randomized data to guide management of STEMI patients with multivessel disease. SS-PCI group in cohort studies has higher baseline risk compared to IRA-PCI. The primary end point is higher for SS-PCI in observational cohort studies but this difference did not persist after exclusion of shock patients and for analysis limited to randomized controlled trials. These findings underscore the need of a large randomized controlled trial to guide therapy for a commonly encountered clinical situation.