loading page

Progressive Tricuspid Regurgitation and Elevated Tricuspid Regurgitation Pressure Gradient after Transvenous Permanent Pacemaker Implantation
  • +6
  • Wei-Chieh LeeOrcid,
  • Hsiu-Yu Fang,
  • Huang-Chung Chen,
  • Yung-Lung Chen,
  • Tzu-Hsien Tsai,
  • Kuo-Li Pan,
  • Yu-Sheng Lin,
  • Wen-Hao Liu,
  • Mien-Cheng Chen
Wei-Chieh Lee
Orcid
Chang Gung Memorial Hospital Kaohsiung Branch
Author Profile
Hsiu-Yu Fang
Chang Gung Memorial Hospital Kaohsiung Branch
Author Profile
Huang-Chung Chen
Chang Gung Memorial Hospital Kaohsiung Branch
Author Profile
Yung-Lung Chen
Chang Gung Memorial Hospital Kaohsiung Branch
Author Profile
Tzu-Hsien Tsai
Chang Gung Memorial Hospital Kaohsiung Branch
Author Profile
Kuo-Li Pan
Chang Gung Memorial Hospital Kaohsiung Branch
Author Profile
Yu-Sheng Lin
Chang Gung Memorial Hospital Kaohsiung Branch
Author Profile
Wen-Hao Liu
Chang Gung Memorial Hospital Kaohsiung Branch
Author Profile
Mien-Cheng Chen
Chang Gung Memorial Hospital-Kaohsiung Medical Center, Chang Gung University College of Medicine
Author Profile

Peer review status:UNDER REVIEW

25 Jun 2020Submitted to Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology
25 Jun 2020Assigned to Editor
25 Jun 2020Submission Checks Completed
06 Jul 2020Reviewer(s) Assigned

Abstract

Background The association of post-implant tricuspid regurgitation (TR) and heart failure (HF) hospitalization in patients without HF and preexisting abnormal TR and TR pressure gradient (PG) remain unclear. This study aimed to explore the clinical outcomes about progressive post-implant TR after permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation. Methods A total of 1,670 patients who underwent a single ventricular or dual-chamber transvenous PPM implantation at our hospital between January 2003 and December 2017 were included in the study. Patients with prior valvular surgery, heart failure (HF), and baseline abnormal TR and TRPG were excluded. Finally, a total of 1,075 patients were enrolled in this study. Progressive TR was defined as increased TR grade of ≥2 degrees and/or TRPG of >30 mmHg after implant. Results 198 (18.4%) patients (group 1) experienced progressive post-implant TR and/or elevated TRPG. Group 1 had l larger changes in post-implant TRPG (group 1 vs. group 2; 12.8 ± 9.6 mmHg vs. 1.1 ± 7.6 mmHg; p < 0.001) than group 2 without progressive post-implant TR. Group 1 had a higher incidence of HF hospitalization compared to group 2 (13.6% vs. 4.7%; p < 0.001). Pre-implant TRPG (HR: 1.075; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.032-1.121; p = 0.001) and post-implant left atrial dimension (HR: 1.076; 95% CI: 1.038-1.114; p < 0.001) were independent predictors of progressive post-implant TR. Conclusion After a transvenous ventricular-based PPM implantation, 18.4% of patients experienced progressive post-implant TR and/or elevated TRPG. Higher pre-implant TRPG and larger post-implant LA dimension were independent predictors of progressive post-implant TR.