Impact of balloon predilatation in patients with reduced versus preserved ejection fraction during transcatheter aortic valve implantation. (November 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Elnaggar, Heba M.; Schoels, Wolfgang; Mahmoud, Marwan S.; Kishk, Yehia T.; Kullmer, Matthias; Dia, Mohamad; Algowhary, Magdy
• Is Part Of: Asian cardiovascular & thoracic annals. Volume 30:Number 9(2022)
• Page Start: 985
• Page End: 991
• Publication Date: 2022-11
• Subjects: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation -- balloon predilatation -- reduced ejection factor; Heart -- Diseases -- Asia -- Periodicals; Heart -- Diseases -- Pacific Area -- Periodicals; Heart -- Diseases -- Periodicals; Heart -- Surgery -- Asia -- Periodicals; Heart -- Surgery -- Pacific Area -- Periodicals; Heart -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Chest -- Surgery -- Asia -- Periodicals; Chest -- Surgery -- Pacific Area -- Periodicals; Chest -- Surgery -- Periodicals; 617.412
• DOI: 10.1177/02184923221126086
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0218-4923

Abstract

Background: Although there is a trend toward direct transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), still balloon predilatation is necessary in some cases, especially in patients with severe calcification. However, predilatation including rapid ventricular pacing may have adverse outcomes, especially in patients with reduced ejection factor (EF). Objective: To evaluate the impact of predilatation on in-hospital outcomes in patients with reduced versus preserved EF underwent TAVI. Methods: This was a prospective observational study including 110 patients (72 patients with preserved EF (≥50%) and 38 patients with reduced EF (<50%)) who underwent TAVI. The two groups were compared regarding in-hospital outcomes. Results: Predilatation was done routinely in all 110 patients. The mean age was significantly higher in patients with preserved EF (82.76 ± 5.74 vs. 80.13 ± 6.51 years; p = 0.03). The majority (51.4%) of patients with preserved EF were females but the majority (73.7%) of those with reduced EF were males ( P < 0.001). Predilatation showed no statistical difference regarding in-hospital mortality (2.6% vs. 1.4%; p = 0.29), hemodynamic instability (5.3% vs. 0.0%; p = 0.11), stroke (0% vs. 1.4%; p = 0.67), conduction defects (13.2% vs. 19.4%; p = 0.29), permanent pacemaker implantation (7.9% vs. 5.5%; p = 0.45), paravalvular leakage (5.3% vs. 2.8%; p = 0.42), vascular complications (7.9% vs. 11.1%; p = 0.43), and acute kidney injury (7.9% vs. 7%; p = 0.4) in patients with reduced versus preserved EF, respectively. Conclusion: When balloon predilatation is inevitable during TAVI it is safe in patients with reduced as well as preserved EF with no added risk of hemodynamic instability or other outcomes.