Patient population
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 this study. Patients
with prior valvular surgery, HF and left ventricular ejection fraction
(LVEF) <50%, dilated cardiomyopathy, hypertrophic
cardiomyopathy, and preexisting abnormal (mild-moderate, moderate or
severe) TR and abnormal (>30 mmHg) TRPG were excluded.
Patients without follow-up records for PPM and without complete
follow-up echocardiography were also excluded (Figure 1). Finally, a
total of 1,075 patients were enrolled in this study and were divided
into two groups: group 1 consisted of 198 patients with increased degree
of post-implant TR (≥2 degrees) and/or abnormal TRPG and group 2
consisted of 877 patients without increased degree of post-implant TR
and abnormal TRPG. Patients with dual-chamber PPM implantation underwent
pacing in the dual chamber rate-adaptive mode, whereas patients with
single ventricular PPM implantation underwent pacing in the
ventricular-inhibited rate-adaptive mode. General demographics,
comorbidities, lead positions, pacing QRS durations, pacing percentages,
echocardiographic parameters, HF hospitalization, and cardiovascular and
all-cause mortality were compared between the groups.