Login
Search
Search
0 Dates
2026
2025
2024
2023
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
0 Events
CPC 2018
CPC 2019
Curso de Atualização em Medicina Cardiovascular 2019
Reunião Anual Conjunta dos Grupos de Estudo de Cirurgia Cardíaca, Doenças Valvulares e Ecocardiografia da SPC
CPC 2020
CPC 2021
CPC 2022
CPC 2023
CPC 2024
CPC 2025
CPC 2026
0 Topics
A. Basics
B. Imaging
C. Arrhythmias and Device Therapy
D. Heart Failure
E. Coronary Artery Disease, Acute Coronary Syndromes, Acute Cardiac Care
F. Valvular, Myocardial, Pericardial, Pulmonary, Congenital Heart Disease
G. Aortic Disease, Peripheral Vascular Disease, Stroke
H. Interventional Cardiology and Cardiovascular Surgery
I. Hypertension
J. Preventive Cardiology
K. Cardiovascular Disease In Special Populations
L. Cardiovascular Pharmacology
M. Cardiovascular Nursing
N. E-Cardiology / Digital Health, Public Health, Health Economics, Research Methodology
O. Basic Science
P. Other
0 Themes
01. History of Cardiology
02. Clinical Skills
03. Imaging
04. Arrhythmias, General
05. Atrial Fibrillation
06. Supraventricular Tachycardia (non-AF)
07. Syncope and Bradycardia
08. Ventricular Arrhythmias and Sudden Cardiac Death (SCD)
09. Device Therapy
10. Chronic Heart Failure
11. Acute Heart Failure
12. Coronary Artery Disease (Chronic)
13. Acute Coronary Syndromes
14. Acute Cardiac Care
15. Valvular Heart Disease
16. Infective Endocarditis
17. Myocardial Disease
18. Pericardial Disease
19. Tumors of the Heart
20. Congenital Heart Disease and Pediatric Cardiology
21. Pulmonary Circulation, Pulmonary Embolism, Right Heart Failure
22. Aortic Disease
23. Peripheral Vascular and Cerebrovascular Disease
24. Stroke
25. Interventional Cardiology
26. Cardiovascular Surgery
27. Hypertension
28. Risk Factors and Prevention
29. Rehabilitation and Sports Cardiology
30. Cardiovascular Disease in Special Populations
31. Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapy
32. Cardiovascular Nursing
33. e-Cardiology / Digital Health
34. Public Health and Health Economics
35. Research Methodology
36. Basic Science
37. Miscellanea
0 Resources
Abstract
Slides
Vídeo
Report
CLEAR FILTERS
Risk stratification of left bundle branch block after transcatheter aortic valve implantation: electrophysiological study versus ambulatory monitoring
Session:
Sessão de Posters 19 - Temas quentes em pacing e eletrofisiologia na era atual
Speaker:
Pedro Miguel Mangas Neto da Palma
Congress:
CPC 2026
Topic:
C. Arrhythmias and Device Therapy
Theme:
09. Device Therapy
Subtheme:
09.6 Device Therapy - Other
Session Type:
Posters Eletrónicos
FP Number:
---
Authors:
Pedro Mangas Palma; Helena Moreira; Miguel Rocha; João Calvão; Ricardo Pinto; Marta Madeira; Gonçalo Pestana; Ana Lebreiro; Manuel Campelo; Luís Adão
Abstract
<p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:medium"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="color:#000000"><strong><span style="font-size:13.5pt"><span style="font-family:"Arial Narrow",sans-serif"><span style="color:black">Background</span></span></span></strong></span></span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:medium"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="color:#000000"><span style="font-size:13.5pt"><span style="font-family:"Arial Narrow",sans-serif"><span style="color:black">Left bundle branch block (LBBB) is a common conduction disturbance after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and has been associated with delayed high-grade AV block and increased permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI). Management varies between invasive evaluation with electrophysiological study (EPS) and conservative approaches employing ambulatory continuous ECG monitoring (AECG). The optimal approach balancing safety, diagnostic yield, and resource utilization remains undefined. </span></span></span></span></span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:medium"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="color:#000000"><strong><span style="font-size:13.5pt"><span style="font-family:"Arial Narrow",sans-serif"><span style="color:black">Aim</span></span></span></strong></span></span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:medium"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="color:#000000"><span style="font-size:13.5pt"><span style="font-family:"Arial Narrow",sans-serif"><span style="color:black">To compare EPS versus AECG for risk stratification of patients with persistent LBBB after TAVI.</span></span></span></span></span></span></p> <p style="text-align:start"><span style="font-size:medium"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="color:#000000"><strong><span style="font-size:13.5pt"><span style="font-family:"Arial Narrow",sans-serif"><span style="color:black">Methods</span></span></span></strong></span></span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:medium"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="color:#000000"><span style="font-size:13.5pt"><span style="font-family:"Arial Narrow",sans-serif"><span style="color:black">We conducted a single-centre retrospective cohort study of all patients who underwent TAVI between January 2020 and January 2025. Patients with persistent LBBB before discharge were managed either with EPS or AECG for 7–15 days, according to availability and clinical judgement. Baseline clinical, procedural, and PPI data were recorded.</span></span></span></span></span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:medium"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="color:#000000"><span style="font-size:13.5pt"><span style="font-family:"Arial Narrow",sans-serif"><span style="color:black">Group comparisons used χ² or Fisher’s exact tests for categorical variables and t-tests or Wilcoxon rank-sum tests for continuous variables, according to data distribution. Negative predictive value (NPV) for late PPI was calculated for each strategy among patients with normal EPS or AECG.</span></span></span></span></span></span></p> <p style="text-align:start"><span style="font-size:medium"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="color:#000000"><strong><span style="font-size:13.5pt"><span style="font-family:"Arial Narrow",sans-serif"><span style="color:black">Results</span></span></span></strong></span></span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:medium"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="color:#000000"><span style="font-size:13.5pt"><span style="font-family:"Arial Narrow",sans-serif"><span style="color:black">Of 1076 TAVI patients, 131 with persistent LBBB underwent risk stratification (EPS n=53, AECG n=78). Median age was 81 years; 62% were female, 30% received balloon-expandable valves and 24% had atrial fibrillation. Baseline comorbidities were similar, but EPS patients had longer mean PR (192 vs. 181 ms, p < 0.001) and QRS (157 vs. 149 ms, p = 0.04) intervals.</span></span></span></span></span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:medium"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="color:#000000"><span style="font-size:13.5pt"><span style="font-family:"Arial Narrow",sans-serif"><span style="color:black">After a median follow-up of 26 months, PPI was significantly more frequent in the EPS group (38% vs. 10%, p < 0.001), reflecting the higher-risk profile of patients selected for EPS. In this group, most PPI procedures were performed at baseline due to a prolonged HV interval (90%). Among 35 patients with normal EPS, 2 (6%) required late PPI (NPV 94%). Both cases were older women treated with self-expanding valves, admitted with paroxysmal advanced AV block.</span></span></span></span></span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:medium"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="color:#000000"><span style="font-size:13.5pt"><span style="font-family:"Arial Narrow",sans-serif"><span style="color:black">In the AECG group, 4 patients (5%) had high-grade AV block detected early after discharge, leading to prompt PPI; 2 had severe presentations requiring emergency assessment, including 1 with cardiopulmonary arrest. Extending AECG beyond 7 days did not improve diagnostic yield. Among 74 patients with normal AECG, 4 (5%) required late PPI (NPV 95%).</span></span></span></span></span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:medium"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="color:#000000"><strong><span style="font-size:13.5pt"><span style="font-family:"Arial Narrow",sans-serif"><span style="color:black">Conclusions</span></span></span></strong></span></span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:medium"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><span style="color:#000000"><span style="font-size:13.5pt"><span style="font-family:"Arial Narrow",sans-serif"><span style="color:black">Both strategies showed high NPV for late PPI after TAVI. EPS allows early identification of patients at higher risk, but likely incurs higher costs and more frequent PPI. AECG carries a residual risk of severe late-presenting bradyarrhythmias, although most clinically significant events were detected early after discharge. These findings support a tailored approach based on patient risk profile and local resources.</span></span></span></span></span></span></p>
Slides
Our mission: To reduce the burden of cardiovascular disease
Visit our site