Background As transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) technology expands to healthy and lower‐risk populations, the burden and predictors of procedure‐related complications including the need for permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation needs to be identified. Methods and Results Digital databases were systematically searched to identify studies reporting the incidence of PPM implantation after TAVR. A random‐ and fixed‐effects model was used to calculate unadjusted odds ratios (OR) for all predictors. A total of 78 studies, recruiting 31 261 patients were included in the final analysis. Overall, 6212 patients required a PPM, with a mean of 18.9% PPM per study and net rate ranging from 0.16% to 51%. The pooled estimates on a random‐effects model indicated significantly higher odds of post‐TAVR PPM implantation for men (OR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.04–1.28); for patients with baseline mobitz type‐1 second‐degree atrioventricular block (OR, 3.13; 95% CI, 1.64–5.93), left anterior hemiblock (OR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.09–1.86), bifascicular block (OR, 2.59; 95% CI, 1.52–4.42), right bundle‐branch block (OR, 2.48; 95% CI, 2.17–2.83), and for periprocedural atriorventricular block (OR, 4.17; 95% CI, 2.69–6.46). The mechanically expandable valves had 1.44 (95% CI, 1.18–1.76), while self‐expandable valves had 1.93 (95% CI, 1.42–2.63) fold higher odds of PPM requirement compared with self‐expandable and balloon‐expandable valves, respectively. Conclusions Male sex, baseline atrioventricular conduction delays, intraprocedural atrioventricular block, and use of mechanically expandable and self‐expanding prosthesis served as positive predictors of PPM implantation in patients undergoing TAVR.

Zaidi et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License CC-BY 4.0., which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

<b><i>Background:</i></b> Damage control resuscitation forms the cornerstone of management in trauma surgery. Several blood products have been widely used for preoperative transfusions prior to emergency surgeries and for hemorrhage control in trauma. Prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) is now being introduced as an essential component of damage control resuscitation. <b><i>Summary:</i></b> We did a comparative descriptive analysis of several single and multi-institutional clinical trials and retrospective cohort studies. The primary focus of these studies was a comparison between PCC and other transfusion modalities including recombinant factor VIIa, fresh-frozen plasma, and fibrinogen based on several vital parameters. The parameters included rapid international normalized ratio reversal, hospital length of stay, cost-effectiveness, mortality rate, and rate of thromboembolic complications. <b><i>Key Points:</i></b> Although still awaiting its approval from the FDA for use in traumatic coagulopathy, 4-factor PCC has shown far more convincing results in contrast to former transfusion modalities, even 3-factor PCC. However, more prospective extensive clinical trials on national levels are needed to compare its effectiveness to 3-factor PCC and gather promising recognition in the trauma care fraternity.