Oversizing Increases Pacemaker Implantation Rate After Sutureless Minimally Invasive Aortic Valve Replacement

Abstract

Objective

Cardiac conduction system disturbances potentially leading to permanent pacemaker implantation are significant postoperative complications after aortic valve replacement. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of sutureless prosthetic valve oversizing on permanent pacemaker implantation rate.

Methods

This multicenter retrospective study included 306 patients who underwent minimally invasive aortic valve replacement with the Perceval sutureless valve. Oversizing was determined by the implanted valve size indexed to body surface area. Data were analyzed with a multivariable logistic regression model.

Results

This study confirmed excellent postoperative results for minimally invasive aortic valve replacement with right anterior minithoracotomy approach and rapid deployment sutureless valves. Mortality rate was 1%. Eighteen (5.9%) patients received a new permanent pacemaker. Multivariable logistic regression model (P = 0.05) found oversizing as significant risk factor (P = 0.017) for permanent postoperative pacemaker implantation independent of patient age. There was a significant negative correlation between the indexed implanted valve size and the mean and peak postoperative transvalvular gradients (P < 0.001).

Conclusions

Oversizing of sutureless prosthetic aortic valves is a risk factor for postoperative permanent pacemaker implantation. Proper sizing of Perceval is important to avoid complications and ensure optimal valve performance.

Keywords

aortic valve replacement conduction minimally invasive oversizing pacemaker sutureless valve

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Chang

Raza

Altarabsheh

et al. Minimally invasive approaches to surgical aortic valve replacement: a meta-analysis. Ann Thorac Surg 2018; 106: 1881–1889.doi:10.1016/j.athoracsur.2018.07.018

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30189193

Mazine

Teoh

Bouhout

et al. Sutureless aortic valve replacement: a Canadian multicentre study. Can J Cardiol 2015; 31: 63–68.doi:10.1016/j.cjca.2014.10.030

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25547552

Gersak

Fischlein

Folliguet

et al. Sutureless, rapid deployment valves and stented bioprosthesis in aortic valve replacement: recommendations of an International Expert Consensus Panel. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2016; 49: 709–718.doi:10.1093/ejcts/ezv369

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26516193

Laborde

Fischlein

Hakim-Meibodi

et al. Clinical and haemodynamic outcomes in 658 patients receiving the Perceval sutureless aortic valve: early results from a prospective European multicentre study (the Cavalier Trial). Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2016; 49: 978–986.doi:10.1093/ejcts/ezv257

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26245628

Bouhout

Mazine

Rivard

et al. Conduction disorders after sutureless aortic valve replacement. Ann Thorac Surg 2017; 103: 1254–1260.doi:10.1016/j.athoracsur.2016.07.044

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27717423

Vogt

Pfeiffer

Dell’Aquila

et al. Sutureless aortic valve replacement with Perceval bioprosthesis: are there predicting factors for postoperative pacemaker implantation? Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 2016; 22: 253–258.doi:10.1093/icvts/ivv330

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26614526

Shrestha

Fischlein

Meuris

et al. European multicentre experience with the sutureless Perceval valve: clinical and haemodynamic outcomes up to 5 years in over 700 patients. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2016; 49: 234–241.doi:10.1093/ejcts/ezv040

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25750010

Matthews

IG.

Fazal

IA.

Bates

MGD

et al. In patients undergoing aortic valve replacement, what factors predict the requirement for permanent pacemaker implantation? Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 2011; 12: 475–479.doi:10.1510/icvts.2010.254607

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21138915

Vogt

Moscarelli

Nicoletti

et al. Sutureless aortic valve and pacemaker rate: from surgical tricks to clinical outcomes. Ann Thorac Surg 2019; 108: 99–105.doi:10.1016/j.athoracsur.2018.12.037

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30684479

10.

Schroeter

Linke

Haensig

et al. Predictors of permanent pacemaker implantation after Medtronic CoreValve bioprosthesis implantation. Europace 2012; 14: 1759–1763.doi:10.1093/europace/eus191

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22733983

11.

Yanagawa

Cruz

Boisvert

et al. A simple modification to lower incidence of heart block with sutureless valve implantation. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2016; 152: 630–632.doi:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2016.02.034

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26971380

12.

Pibarot

Dumesnil

. Prosthesis-patient mismatch: definition, clinical impact, and prevention. Heart 2006; 92: 1022–1029.doi:10.1136/hrt.2005.067363

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16251232

13.

Cerillo

AG.

Amoretti

Mariani

et al. Increased gradients after aortic valve replacement with the Perceval valve: the role of oversizing. Ann Thorac Surg 2018; 106: 121–128.doi:10.1016/j.athoracsur.2017.12.044

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29408354

14.

Baert

Astarci

Noirhomme

et al. The risk of oversizing with the Perceval S sutureless bioprosthesis in small aortic annulus. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2017; 153: 270–272.doi:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2016.09.035

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27756462

15.

Brown

ML.

McKellar

SH.

Sundt

et al. Ministernotomy versus conventional sternotomy for aortic valve replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2009; 137: 670–679.doi:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2008.08.010

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19258087

16.

Miceli

Murzi

Gilmanov

et al. Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement using right minithoracotomy is associated with better outcomes than ministernotomy. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2014; 148: 133–137.doi:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2013.07.060

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24035370

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.21 MB

0.00 MB