EuroPCR 2019 | Long-Term Follow-Up for New Left Bundle Branch Block After TAVR Is Reassuring with Certain Precautions

Long-term follow-up of patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and developed left bundle branch block (LBBB) after the procedure seems reassuring. Although it is not benign, it is associated with more conduction defects, more pacemakers, and worsening ventricular function.

Long-term follow-up “partially reassures” the concerns of many physicians about new LBBB after TAVR.

While roughly one in five patients developed a conduction disturbance, there was no difference in clinical events, including mortality or heart failure hospitalizations, at 3 years between patients with new LBBB and those who did not develop LBBB. In any case, there was a higher rate of pacemaker implantation and a reduction in ejection fraction among those who developed new LBBB. Patients who required a pacemaker mainly did it during the first year.

The incidence of LBBB depends on the study, device type, implantation techniques, and patient comorbidities, but data mainly point towards an association with self-expanding valves.


Read also: EuroPCR 2019 | REVELATION: Drug Coated Balloons in ST Elevation MI.


This new study, presented at EuroPCR 2019 and published simultaneously in JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions, included 1415 consecutive patients who underwent TAVR with a balloon-expandable valve (Sapien, Sapien XT, or Sapien 3; Edwards Lifesciences) or a self-expanding valve (CoreValve or Evolut R; Medtronic) at nine sites between 2007 and 2015.

The final analysis included 1020 cases, since 395 patients were excluded due to failed implantation, conversion to surgery, procedural death, or, in most cases, the implantation of a pacemaker during the index hospitalization.

New LBBB occurred in 461 patients immediately after device release and, of these, LBBB persisted in 212 patients (20.1%). The incidence of LBBB was significantly higher among patients with CoreValve/Evolut R devices.

At 3 years, there was no significant difference in all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, sudden death, or heart failure hospitalizations between those who developed LBBB and those who did not.


Read also: EuroPCR 2019 | TRILUMINATE: Tricuspid Repair with Clip Improves Regurgitation and Quality of Life.


There was a difference in pacemaker implantation (15.5% vs. 5.4%; hazard ratio [HR]: 2.45) and it was highest in the first study year, when the risk tripled.

The mean time for pacemaker implantation was 8 months and, after the first year, rates of pacemaker implantation were similar for both groups.

Original Title: Long-term outcomes in patients with new-onset persistent left bundle branch block following TAVR.

Reference: Chamandi C et al. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2019; Epub ahead of print.


Subscribe to our weekly newsletter

Get the latest scientific articles on interventional cardiology

We are interested in your opinion. Please, leave your comments, thoughts, questions, etc., below. They will be most welcome.

More articles by this author

Contemporary Challenges in Left Atrial Appendage Closure: Updated Approach to Device Embolization

Even though percutaneous left atrial appendage (LAA) closure is generally safe, device embolization – with 0 to 1.5% global incidence – is still a...

Cardiac Remodeling After Percutaneous ASD Closure: Should It Be Immediate or Progressive?

Atrial septal defect (ASD) is a common congenital heart disease that generates a left-to-right shunt, leading to right-side chamber overload and a risk of...

Is it really necessary to monitor all patients after TAVR?

Conduction disorders (CD) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are a frequent complication and may lead to the need for permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI)....

Is it really necessary to monitor all patients after TAVR?

Conduction disorders (CD) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are a frequent complication and may lead to the need for permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI)....

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img

Recent Articles

COILSEAL: Use of Coils in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention, Useful for Complication Management?

The use of coils as vascular closing tool has been steadily expanding beyond its traditional role in neuroradiology into coronary territory, where it remains...

Treatment of In-Stent Restenosis in Small Vessels with Paclitaxel-Coated Balloons

Coronary artery disease (CAD) in smaller epicardial vessels occurs in 30% to 67% of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention and poses particular technical challenges....

Contemporary Challenges in Left Atrial Appendage Closure: Updated Approach to Device Embolization

Even though percutaneous left atrial appendage (LAA) closure is generally safe, device embolization – with 0 to 1.5% global incidence – is still a...