Ávila-Vanzzini N, Romero-Aragonés C, Verdejo-Paris J, Meléndez-Ramírez G, Arias-Godínez JA, Rodríguez-Chávez LL, Romero-Cárdenas Á, Roldán-Gómez FJ, Ruiz-Esparza ME, Herrera-Bello H, Kuri-Alfaro J

Language: Spanish
References: 19
Page: 520-526
PDF size: 190.90 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Introduction. Aortic valve replacement in patients with severe aortic stenosis may be complicated by complete atrioventricular block (CAVB), requiring a permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation. Predicting this complication could help to plan the surgical. Objective. Determine whether electrocardiography and echocardiography are useful methods for predicting the need for PPM. Material and methods. A retrospective, observational and transversal study was performed. An echocardiography based semi-quantitative classification was implemented to graduate the extent of calcification of the aortic valve. Results. We included 95 patients; 10 of them required PPM implantation (10.52%). In the pre-surgical basal electrocardiogram we observed that 90% of patients that required PPM had conduction abnormalities as opposed to only 24.7% in the other group, p = 0.001. A 1st and 2nd degree AV block (AVB 1 and 2) was identified in 8 patients that subsequently needed PPM (80%) vs. 5 patients (5.9%), in the group that did not required it, p = 0.001.OR 41.7, IC 95% 6.5-68. We found a grade 3 calcification extent in 80% of patients who required PPM implant compared with only 17.6% of patients in the other group, p = 0.04, OR 4.8, IC 95% 0.76-29. The AVB 1 and 2 were the single predictor in multivariate analysis but the calcification 3 + AVB 1 and 2, increased sensibility. Conclusion. In patients with aortic stenosis in whom aortic valve replacement was performed, identifying AVB 1 and 2 on the basal electrocardiogram is a useful tool in order to identify requirement of PPM. The grade 3 of calcification extent increased the sensibility of this prediction.

REFERENCES

1. Vahanian A, Alfieri O, Andreotti F, Antunes MJ, Barón-Esquivias G, Baumgartner H, et al. Guidelines on the management of valvular heart disease (version 2012). Eur Heart J 2012; 33(19): 2451-96.

2. Bagur R, Manazzoni JM, Dumont É, Doyle D, Perron J, Dagenais F, et al. Permanent pacemaker implantation following isolated aortic valve replacement in a large cohort of elderly patients with severe aortic stenosis. Heart 2011; 97(20): 1687-94.

3. Limongelli G, Ducceschi V, D’Andrea A, Renzulli A, Sarubbi B, De Feo M, et al. Risk factors for pacemaker implantation following aortic valve replacement: a single center experience. Heart 2003; 89(8): 901-04.

4. Erdogan HB, Kayalar N, Ardal H, Omeroglu SN, Kirali K, Guler M, et al. Risk factors for requirement of permanent pacemaker implantation after aortic valve replacement. J Card Surg 2006; 21(3): 211-5.

5. Van Mieghem NM, Head SJ, de Jong W, van Domburg RT, Serruys PW, de Jaegere PP, et al. Persistent annual permanent pacemaker implantation rate after surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with severe aortic stenosis. Ann Thorac Surg 2012; 94(4): 1143-9.

6. Follath F, Ginks WR. Changes in the QRS complex after aortic valve replacement. Br Heart J 1972; 34(6): 553-60.

7. Fukuda T, Hawley RL, Edwards JE. Lesions of conduction tissue complicating aortic valvular replacement. Chest 1976; 69(5): 605-14.

8. Davies M, Harris A. Pathological basis of primary heart block. Br Heart J 1969; 31(2): 219-26.

9. Lewis JW Jr, Webb CR, Pickard SD, Lehman J, Jacobsen G. The increased need for a permanent pacemaker after reoperative cardiac surgery. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1998; 116(1): 74-81.

10. Corciu AI, Siciliano V, Poggianti E, Petersen C, Venneri L, Picano E. Cardiac calcification by transthoracic echocardiography in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease. Int J Cardiol 2010; 42(3): 288-95.

11. Lang RM, Bierig M, Devereux RB, Flachskampf FA, Foster E, Pellikka PA, et al. Recommendation for Chamber Quantification: A report from American Society of echocardiography’s guidelines and standards committee and the chamber quantification writing group, developed in conjunction with the European Association of Echocardiography, a branch of the European Society of Cardiology. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2005; 18(12): 1440-63.

12. Friedman HS, Zaman Q, Haft JI, Melendez S. Assessment of atrioventricular conduction in aortic valve disease. Br Heart J 1978; 40(8): 911-7.

13. Gordon RS, Ivanov J, Cohen G, Ralph-Edwards AL. Permanent cardiac pacing after a cardiac operation: predicting the use of permanent pacemakers. Ann Thorac Surg 1998; 661(5): 1698-704.

14. Del Rizzo DF, Nishimura S, Lau C, Sever J, Goldman BS. Cardiac pacing following surgery for acquired heart disease. J Card Surg 1996; 11(5): 332-40.

15. Lipton IH, Cameron DA, David TE. Morbidity of permanent pacing following valvular surgery [abstract]. PACE 1995; 18: 1768.

16. Pachulski RT, Chan KL. Progression of aortic valve dysfunction in 51 adult patients with congenital bicuspid aortic valve: assessment and follow up by Doppler echocardiography. Br Heart J 1993; 69(3): 237-40.

17. Dawkins S, Hobson AR, Kalra PR, Tang AT, Monro JL, Dawkins KD. Permanent pacemaker implantation after isolated aortic valve replacement: incidence, indications, and predictors. Ann Thorac Surg 2008; 85(1): 108-12.

18. Matthews IG, Fazal IA, Bates MG, Turley AJ. In patients undergoing aortic valve replacement, what factors predict the requirement for permanent pacemaker implantation? Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 2011; 12(3): 475-9.

19. Nair CK, Sketch MH, Ahmed I, Thomson W, Ryschon K, Woodruff MP, et al. Calcific valvular aortic stenosis with and without mitral annular calcium. Am J Cardiol 1987; 60(10): 865-70.