Key result
Temporary RV pacing via permanent leads during TAVR linked to 0% tamponade risk versus standard wires.
Why the study?
Cardiac tamponade from temporary right ventricular pacemaker perforation is a rare but serious complication in TAVR, prompting investigation into its incidence and relationship to the type of pacing lead used.
Does temporary RV pacing through a permanent, passive pacemaker lead reduce pacemaker-related cardiac tamponade compared to a standard temporary pacing wire in patients undergoing TAVR?
Observational (n=810)
No
Does temporary RV pacing through a permanent, passive pacemaker lead reduce pacemaker-related cardiac tamponade compared to a standard temporary pacing wire in patients undergoing TAVR?
Absolute Event Rate: 0% vs 2.1%
p-value: p=0.022
Using a soft-tip permanent, passive pacemaker lead for temporary RV pacing during TAVR significantly reduces the risk of pacemaker-related cardiac tamponade compared to standard temporary pacing wires.
May reduce tamponade risk with permanent leads for TAVR pacing; leaves open confirmation in randomized trials.
BACKGROUND: Cardiac tamponade caused by temporary right ventricular (RV) pacemaker perforation is a rare but serious complication in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). AIMS: To study the incidence of temporary pacemaker related cardiac tamponade in TAVR, and the relation to the type of pacemaker lead used in periprocedural temporary transvenous pacing. METHODS: A single center registry of transfemoral TAVRs in 2014-2020. Main inclusion criterion was peri-operative use of a temporary RV pacing lead. Main exclusion criteria were a preoperatively implanted permanent pacemaker or the exclusive use of left ventricular guidewire pacing. Incident cardiac tamponade was classified as pacemaker lead related, or other. Patients were grouped according to type of temporary RV pacing wire. RESULTS: 810 patients were included (age 80.5 ± 7.3 [mean ± standard deviation], female 319, 39.4%). Of these, 566 (69.9%) received a standard RV temporary pacing wire (RV-TPW), and 244 (30.1%) received temporary RV pacing through a permanent, passive pacemaker lead (RV-TPPL). In total, 18 (2.2%) events of cardiac tamponade occurred, 12 (67%) were pacemaker lead related. All pacemaker lead-related cardiac tamponades occurred in the group who received a standard RV-TPW and none in the group who received RV-TPPL (n = 12 [2.1%] vs. n = 0 [0%], p = 0.022). No difference in cardiac tamponade due to other causes was seen between the groups (p = 0.82). CONCLUSIONS: The use of soft-tip RV-TPPL was associated with a lower risk of pacemaker related cardiac tamponade in TAVR. When perioperative pacing is indicated, temporary RV-TPPL may contribute to a significant reduction of cardiac tamponade in TAVR.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Feldt et al. (2023) conducted an observational in Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) (n=810). Temporary RV pacing through a permanent, passive pacemaker lead (RV-TPPL) vs. Standard RV temporary pacing wire (RV-TPW) was evaluated on Pacemaker lead-related cardiac tamponade (p=0.022). Temporary RV pacing using a permanent, passive pacemaker lead during TAVR was associated with a lower risk of pacemaker lead-related cardiac tamponade compared to standard wires (0% vs 2.1%, p=0.022).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: