Need for permanent pacemaker as a complication of transcatheter aortic valve implantation and surgical aortic valve replacement in elderly patients with severe aortic stenosis and similar baseline electrocardiographic findings.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the incidence and predictive factors of complete atrioventricular block (AVB) and permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Background: No data exist on the need for PPI after TAVI versus SAVR in patients with similar baseline electrocardiographic (ECG) findings. Methods: A total of 411 patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) and no prior pacemaker who underwent TAVI with the balloon-expandable Edwards valve (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, California) were matched (1:1) with 411 elderly patients with severe AS who underwent isolated SAVR on the basis of baseline ECG findings. The incidence, reasons, and predictive factors for PPI within 30 days after the procedure were compared between groups. Results: Mean age was similar in both groups (p 0.11), and the TAVI group had a higher Society of Thoracic Surgeons score (p 0.001). The rate of new PPI was higher after TAVI (7.3%) compared with SAVR (3.4%), p 0.014. Complete AVB and severe symptomatic bradycardia, respectively, were the reasons for PPI in the TAVI (5.6% and 1.7%, respectively) and SAVR (2.7% and 0.7%, respectively) groups (p 0.039 for complete AVB, p NS for symptomatic bradycardia). The presence of baseline right bundle branch block was the only variable associated with PPI in the TAVI group (odds ratio: 8.61, 95% confidence interval: 3.14 to 23.67, p 0.0001), where as no variable was found in the SAVR group. Conclusions: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation was associated with a higher rate of complete AVB and PPI compared with SAVR in elderly patients with severe AS and similar baseline ECG findings. The presence of baseline right bundle branch block correlated with the need for PPI in the TAVI group. (J Am Coll Cardiol Intv 2012;5:540 –51) © 2012 by the American College of Cardiology Foundatio

Complete Versus Culprit-Only Lesion Intervention in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes.

BACKGROUND: A large proportion of patients presenting with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) present with multivessel disease (MVD). There is uncertainty in the role of complete coronary revascularization in this group of patients. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate the outcomes of complete revascularization compared with culprit vessel-only intervention in a large contemporary cohort of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for NSTEMI. METHODS: The authors undertook an observational cohort study of 37,491 NSTEMI patients treated between 2005 and 2015 at the 8 heart attack centers in London. Clinical details were recorded at the time of the procedure into local databases using the British Cardiac Intervention Society (BCIS) PCI dataset. A total of 21,857 patients (58.3%) presented with NSTEMI and MVD. Primary outcome was all-cause mortality at a median follow-up of 4.1 years (interquartile range: 2.2 to 5.8 years). RESULTS: A total of 11,737 (53.7%) patients underwent single-stage complete revascularization during PCI for NSTEMI, rates that significantly increased during the study period (p = 0.006). Those patients undergoing complete revascularization were older and more likely to be male, diabetic, have renal disease and a history of previous myocardial infarction/revascularization compared with the culprit-only revascularization group. Although crude, in-hospital major adverse cardiac event rates were similar (5.2% vs. 4.8%; p = 0.462) between the 2 groups. Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated significant differences in mortality rates between the 2 groups (22.5% complete revascularization vs. 25.9% culprit vessel intervention; p = 0.0005) during the follow-up period. After multivariate Cox analysis (hazard ratio: 0.90; 95% confidence interval: 0.85 to 0.97) and the use of propensity matching (hazard ratio: 0.89; 95% confidence interval: 0.76 to 0.98) complete revascularization was associated with reduced mortality. CONCLUSIONS: In NSTEMI patients with MVD, despite higher initial (in-hospital) mortality rates, single-stage complete coronary revascularization appears to be superior to culprit-only vessel PCI in terms of long-term mortality rates. This supports the need for further randomized study to confirm these findings.Dr. Dalby has received research grants from Abbott Vascular, Daiichi-Sankyo/Lily, and Sanofi; and has been a consultant for AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Medtronic, Edwards Lifesciences, and Boston Scientific. Dr. Smith has received speakers fees/honoraria from Boston Scientific, Abbott Vascular, Vascular Perspectives, and Biosensors Internationa