One Year Pacing Dependency After TAVR
Key facts
- Where
- Montpellier, FranceSee the site
Where in France
- University Hospital of MontpellierMontpellier, FranceContact: Florence Leclercq, ProfessorTaking people
Questions to ask the study team
- How often do I need to come in, and for how long each time?
- Are travel costs paid?
- Can I keep my own doctor?
- What happens if I want to stop?
Contact the study team: see the registry record → Contacts and Locations
Print a page for my doctorTrial details
- Who runs it
- University Hospital, Montpellier
- Trial code
- NCT06756282
- Record updated
- 3 January 2025
- Original description
Pace maker implantation after the procedure of TAVR can be estimated at 15% of patients. However, some studies have shown that the conduction disturbances after TAVR could resolve over time, and that roughly between one- and two-thirds of patients who required a permanent pace maker implantation post TAVR were not found to be dependent at subsequent follow-up. This study aims to evaluate a cohort of patients permanently implanted with a pacemaker post-TAVR for high-grade conductive disorders and to describe the prevalence of effective pacemaker stimulation at 1 year follow-up. Secondary objectives include the evaluation of the prevalence of effective stimulation 3 months after implantation of the pace maker , description of the types of conductive disorders associated with atrial and/or ventricular stimulation, description of the initial indication for pacemaker implantation, description of the characteristics of the population with or without stimulation dependency. The objective is to better rationalize indication of permanent stimulation after TAVIRead full original descriptionShow less
Pacing Dependence at 1 Year Follow-up in Patients Implanted With a Pacemaker After TAVR: a Multicenter Observational Study.
Pace maker implantation after the procedure of TAVR can be estimated at 15% of patients. However, some studies have shown that the conduction disturbances after TAVR could resolve over time, and that roughly between one- and two-thirds of patients who required a permanent pace maker implantation post TAVR were not found to be dependent at subsequent follow-up. This study aims to evaluate a cohort of patients permanently implanted with a pacemaker post-TAVR for high-grade conductive disorders and to describe the prevalence of effective pacemaker stimulation at 1 year follow-up. Secondary objectives include the evaluation of the prevalence of effective stimulation 3 months after implantation of the pace maker , description of the types of conductive disorders associated with atrial and/or ventricular stimulation, description of the initial indication for pacemaker implantation, description of the characteristics of the population with or without stimulation dependency. The objective is to better rationalize indication of permanent stimulation after TAVI
Inclusion: all patients who need a permanent pacemaker implantation after TAVR.
Exclusion: Patients who have already a pace maker before TAVR.