ArticleStructural heart : the journal of the Heart Team2024
Predictors and Trends of New Permanent Pacemaker Implantation: A Subanalysis of the International Navitor IDE Study.
Article in Structural heart : the journal of the Heart Team, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of the Self-Expandable Intra-Annular Navitor Prosthesis with the Balloon-Expandable, Intra-Annular Sapien 3 Prosthesis: A Propensity-Matched Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Review
- Pacemaker Implantation Rates With the Self-Expandable Navitor Valve.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2026Article
- Clinical Impact of Prosthesis Oversizing in Self-Expanding Intra-Annular Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.Structural heart : the journal of the Heart Team · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The Navitor Investigational Device Exemption (IDE) study is a prospective, multicenter, global study assessing the safety and effectiveness of the Navitor valve in a population with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis who are at high and extreme surgical risk. The impact of pre-existing conduction abnormalities and implantation technique on new permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) for the Navitor platform is not fully understood. Therefore, the goal of this analysis was to investigate the associations between patient and procedural factors and the 30-day new PPI rate. Methods: A total of 260 patients who underwent implantation of a Navitor valve in the Navitor IDE study were reviewed. Patients with preprocedural permanent pacemakers (n = 28) were excluded. Baseline risk factors were assessed for statistical significance. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to identify independent predictors of new PPI. Results: Mean age of the pacemaker-naïve population was 83.3 ± 5.2 years, 58.6% were female, average Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was 3.8% ± 1.9%, median frailty score was 1 (interquartile range 1, 2), and 17.7% were deemed at extreme surgical risk. Pre-existing first-degree atrioventricular block and right bundle branch block significantly increased the risk of new PPI postimplantation, whereas left bundle branch block did not. Membranous septum length in relation to noncoronary cusp implant depth was a significant predictor of new PPI, with higher rates of new PPI observed when noncoronary cusp implant depth exceeded membranous septum length. Analysis of implant depth alone revealed deeper implants were associated with a higher rate of new PPI, regardless of patient baseline conduction abnormality. Conclusions: The 30-day rate of new PPI in the Navitor IDE study is associated with patient pre-existing baseline conduction disturbances and implantation depth.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.