ArticleJournal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing2026
Strategy for pacemaker implantation following transcatheter tricuspid valve replacement: A real world single centre experience.
Article in Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHigh-degree AV-Block requiring pacemaker (PM) implantation is a frequent complication after transcatheter tricuspid valve replacement (TTVR), which represents a relative contra-indication to standard right ventricular (RV) lead placement. We report our experience in this patient cohort and compared different PM strategies prioritising interventional valve sparing options.
methodsConsecutive patients treated with the EVOQUE system (Edwards Lifesciences) at our centre between January 2024 and May 2025 were included in this retrospective single centre analysis. Successful implantation of a valve sparing PM and feasibility of PM implantation were assessed.
resultsThis analysis included 39 patients (mean age 77.3 years, 74.4% women, 8 patients with pre-existing PM). High-degree AV-Block requiring PM implantation occurred in 28.2% in our cohort (11/39 patients), the de-novo PM implantation rate was 35.5% (11/31 patients). Complete or incomplete right bundle branch block (RBBB) was the most frequent conduction system disorder after TTVR (11/31 patients). Median time from TTVR to PM implantation was six days [IQR: 2.5-13]. PM implantation was feasible in 11/11 patients (100%), no surgical lead placement was necessary. Implantation of a valve sparing PM was successful in 10/11 patients (90.9%). Leadless PM were implanted in 3/11, coronary sinus lead PM in 7/11 patients. In one patient both interventional valve sparing PM approaches failed and a standard RV lead across the EVOQUE system was implanted.
conclusionHigh-degree AV-Block after TTVR is a frequent complication and PM implantation in these patients demands careful consideration. Valve sparing PM approaches appear feasible and were achieved with reasonable success rates in our cohort.
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.