Why the study?
Atrioventricular conduction delays frequently occur after TAVI involving inflammation and oedema, which corticosteroids reduce and might thereby lower the rate of conduction delays.
Does systemic corticosteroid exposure reduce the composite of permanent pacemaker implantation and new-onset left bundle branch block in patients undergoing TAVI?
Does systemic corticosteroid exposure reduce the composite of permanent pacemaker implantation and new-onset left bundle branch block in patients undergoing TAVI?
Systemic corticosteroid use at the time of TAVI does not significantly reduce the incidence of atrioventricular conduction delays requiring permanent pacemaker implantation or new-onset LBBB.
CS exposure was not associated with fewer post-TAVI conduction delays; leaves open whether targeted anti-inflammatory strategies warrant prospective trials.
BACKGROUND: Atrioventricular conduction delays (AVCD) are common after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and frequently require implantation of a permanent pacemaker (PPM). Autopsy studies demonstrated the role of ischemia, inflammation, and oedema in the pathogenesis of AVCD. Corticosteroids (CS) reduce inflammation and oedema and hence might lead to a lower rate of AVCD. METHODS: Based on a prospective single-center registry, we performed a propensity score (PS) matched analysis of subjects treated with or without systemic CS (>2.5 mg prednisolone-equivalent per day) at the time of TAVI. The primary endpoint was a composite of PPM-implantation and new-onset left bundle branch block (LBBB) within 30 days after TAVI. RESULTS: Among 2213 consecutive patients undergoing TAVI (51.5% female, mean age 82.1 ± 6.1 years) 89 patients were treated with systemic CS, of which 87 were included in the PS matched analysis. At 30 days, rates of the composite of PPM and LBBB were comparable between patients with versus without CS both in the overall cohort (33.7% versus 33.0%, p = 0.89) and the PS matched cohort (34.5% versus 40.2%, p = 0.443). There were no differences in a composite of major or minor vascular complications and major or life-threatening bleeding events between patients with versus without CS in the overall cohort (34.8% versus 26.6%, p = 0.088) or the PS matched cohort (33.3% versus 33.3%, p ≥ 0.999). CONCLUSION: In this exploratory study, intake of systemic CS among patients undergoing TAVI was not associated with differences in rates of AVCD, vascular complications, or bleeding events after TAVI.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bernhard et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: