Background-Permanent pacemaker (PPM) requirement is a recognized complication of transcatheter aortic valve implantation. We assessed the UK incidence of permanent pacing within 30 days of CoreValve implantation and formulated an anatomic and electrophysiological model. Methods and Results-Data from 270 patients at 10 centers in the United Kingdom were examined. Twenty-five patients (8%) had preexisting PPMs; 2 patients had incomplete data. The remaining 243 were 81.3Ϯ6.7 years of age; 50.6% were male. QRS duration increased from 105Ϯ23 to 135Ϯ29 milliseconds (PϽ0.01). Left bundle-branch block incidence was 13% at baseline and 61% after the procedure (PϽ0.001). Eighty-one patients (33.3%) required a PPM within 30 days.Rates of pacing according to preexisting ECG abnormalities were as follows: right bundle-branch block, 65.2%; left bundle-branch block, 43.75%; normal QRS, 27.6%. Among patients who required PPM implantation, the median time to insertion was 4.0 days (interquartile range, 2.0 to 7.75 days). Multivariable analysis revealed that periprocedural atrioventricular block (odds ratio, 6.29; 95% confidence interval, 3.55 to 11.15), balloon predilatation (odds ratio, 2.68; 95% confidence interval, 2.00 to 3.47), use of the larger (29 mm) CoreValve prosthesis (odds ratio, 2.50; 95% confidence interval, 1.22 to 5.11), interventricular septum diameter (odds ratio, 1.18; 95% confidence interval, 1.10 to 3.06), and prolonged QRS duration (odds ratio, 3.45; 95% confidence interval, 1.61 to 7.40) were independently associated with the need for PPM. Conclusion-One third of patients undergoing a CoreValve transcatheter aortic valve implantation procedure require a PPM within 30 days. Periprocedural atrioventricular block, balloon predilatation, use of the larger CoreValve prosthesis, increased interventricular septum diameter and prolonged QRS duration were associated with the need for PPM. (Circulation. 2011;123:951-960.)Key Words: aortic stenosis Ⅲ electrocardiography Ⅲ pacemakers Ⅲ transcatheter aortic valve Ⅲ transcatheter aortic valve implantation A ortic stenosis (AS) is the most common valvular disease in Europe, 1,2 and age is a significant factor in its natural history. 2 Severe AS occurs in 2% to 4% of adults Ͼ65 years of age. 3,4 Current guidelines recommend aortic valve replacement (AVR) surgery for these patients when they become symptomatic or develop impaired left ventricular systolic function with an ejection fraction Ͻ50%. 5,6 However, the aging population generates greater numbers of patients with severe AS and significant comorbidities, 3 prohibitively raising their perioperative risks for surgical AVR. Since the first successful implant in 2002,7 transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has become an increasingly common technology in this cohort. The initial surveillance has been encouraging with respect to procedural success, improvement in quality of life, and short-term and medium-term mortality. 8 -10 Clinical Perspective on p 960Aortic valvular disease is itself associated with cond...

No abstract

ULM stenting with EES is safer and more effective than PES with a reduction in TLF by 53% at two years.

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death amongst women, with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) representing a significant proportion. It has been reported that in women presenting with ACS there is underdiagnosis and consequent undertreatment leading to an increase in hospital and long-term mortality. Several factors have to be taken into account, including lack of awareness both at patient and at physician level. Women are generally not aware of the cardiovascular risk and symptoms, often atypical, and therefore wait longer to seek medical attention. In addition, physicians often underestimate the risk of ACS in women leading to a further delay in accurate diagnosis and timely appropriate treatment, including cardiac catheterisation and primary percutaneous coronary intervention, with consequent delayed revascularisation times. It has been acknowledged by the European Society of Cardiology that gender disparities do exist, with a Class I, Level of Evidence B recommendation that both genders should be treated in the same way when presenting with ACS. However, there is still a lack of awareness and the mission of Women in Innovation, in association with Stent for Life, is to change the perception of women with ACS and to achieve prompt diagnosis and treatment.

In the drug-eluting stent era, paclitaxel-eluting stent implantation of ULMCA stenosis provided excellent immediate and long-term results in this selected population, suggesting that this approach may be considered as a safe and effective alternative to CABG for selected patients with ULMCA who are treated in experienced institutions performing large numbers of PCI procedures.