CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Stent fracture is associated with a higher mortality in patients with type-2 diabetes treated by implantation of a second-generation drug-eluting stent De-escalation of antianginal medications after successful chronic total occlusion percutaneous coronary intervention: Frequency and relationship with health status New technologies for intensive prevention programs after myocardial infarction: rationale and design of the NET-IPP trial Defining Staged Procedures for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Trials A Guidance Document Prospective Elimination of Distal Coronary Sinus to Left Atrial Connection for Atrial Fibrillation Ablation (PRECAF) Randomized Controlled Trial Cardiac Sympathetic Denervation for Refractory Ventricular Arrhythmias Oxidative Stress and Cardiovascular Risk: Obesity, Diabetes, Smoking, and Pollution: Part 3 of a 3-Part Series Left Ventricular Assist Device as a Bridge to Recovery for Patients With Advanced Heart Failure Impact of age and comorbidity on risk stratification in idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension Association of Parenteral Anticoagulation Therapy With Outcomes in Chinese Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome

Clinical TrialSeptember 2019

JOURNAL:JACC Cardiovasc Interv. Article Link

Left Ventricular Rapid Pacing Via the Valve Delivery Guidewire in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

B Faurie, G Souteyrand, the EASY TAVI investigators. Keywords: left-ventricular stimulation; left-ventricular pacing; transcatheter aortic valve implantation; transcatheter aortic valve replacement

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUND - Rapid ventricular pacing is necessary to ensure cardiac standstill during transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).

 

OBJECTIVES - We investigated whether left ventricular (LV)-stimulation via a guidewire reduced procedure duration while maintaining efficacy and safety compared with standard right ventricular (RV)-stimulation.

 

 

METHODS - This is a prospective, multicenter, single-blinded, superiority, randomized controlled trial. Patients undergoing transfemoral TAVI with a Sapien valve (Edwards Lifesciences) were allocated to LV- or RV-stimulation. The primary endpoint was procedure duration. Secondary endpoints included efficacy, safety, and cost at 30 days. This trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02781896).

 

RESULTS - Between May 2017 and May 2018, 307 patients were randomised but 4 were excluded because they did not receive the intended treatment: 303 patients were analysed in the LV- (n=151) or RV-stimulation (n=152) groups. Mean procedure duration was significantly shorter in the LV-stimulation group (48.4±16.9 vs. 55.6±26.9 min, p=0.0013), with a difference of -0.12 (95% CI -0.20 to -0.05) in the log transformed procedure duration (p=0.0012). Effective stimulation was similar in the LV- and RV-stimulation groups: 124 (84.9%) vs. 128 (87.1%), p=0.60. Safety of stimulation was also similar in the LV- and RV-stimulation groups: procedural success occurred in 151 (100%) vs. 151 (99.3%) patients (p=0.99); 30-day MACE-TAVI occurred in 21 (13.9%) vs. 26 (17.1%) patients (p=0.44); fluoroscopy time was lower in the LV-stimulation group (13.48±5.98 vs. 14.60±5.59, p=0.02) as was cost (18,807±1,318 vs. 19,437±2,318, p=0.001).

 

CONCLUSIONS -  Compared with RV-stimulation, LV-stimulation during TAVI was associated with significantly reduced procedure duration, fluoroscopy time, and cost, with similar efficacy and safety.