Advantages and disadvantages of drug challenge during electrophysiological study in patients with new left bundle branch block after transaortic valve implantation

Abstract

Aims: Electrophysiological study (EPS) is recommended in case of new-onset persistent left bundle branch block (NOP-LBBB) after transaortic valve implantation (TAVI) to identify patients at high risk of delayed atrioventricular block (D-AVB). We evaluated the added value of drug challenge, after normal baseline EPS, to predict D-AVB in such patients. Methods: We conducted a comparative single-centre study of two successive periods, during which we used baseline EPS alone (first period) or drug challenge in case of normal baseline EPS (second period), for patients with NOP-LBBB after TAVI. The primary endpoint was a composite of pacemaker use, documented D-AVB, cardiac syncope, sudden death, or delayed pacemaker implantation. Results: Among 736 patients with TAVI implantation between January 2016 and September 2019, 64 with NOP-LBBB were included. During the first period, 4/22 (18.2%) presented with a positive baseline EPS. After a mean (standard deviation [SD]) of 15.6 (8.3) months, 7/22 (31.8%) reached the primary endpoint. During the second period, 19/42 (45.2%) presented with a positive EPS. After a mean (SD) of 12.8 (3.5) months, 8/42 (19.0%) reached the primary endpoint. There was a tendency to increased sensitivity (42.9–87.5%; P = 0.12) and negative predictive value (77.8–95.7%; P = 0.15) of the EPS, respectively during the first to the second period. However, the specificity decreased (93.3–64.7%; P = 0.04). Conclusion: Diagnostic yield improved with drug challenge in case of normal baseline EPS. However, the decrease in specificity led to a high rate of unnecessary pacemaker implantation.

Keywords

• Electrophysiological study
• Left bundle branch block
• Transaortic valve implantation
• Atrioventricular block
• Drug challenge