Heart transplantation in adults: Arrhythmias

Authors:: Howard J Eisen, MD, FACC, FAHA, FHFSA, FAST; Luke S Kusmirek, MD, FACC
Section Editor:: Sharon A Hunt, MD
Deputy Editor:: Todd F Dardas, MD, MS

Literature review current through: Jan 2024.

This topic last updated: Nov 03, 2021.

INTRODUCTION — Cardiac arrhythmias are common in the orthotopic heart transplant recipient, particularly in the early postoperative period. Premature atrial complexes and premature ventricular complexes are especially frequent, with a reported incidence of over 60 percent. Fortunately, these arrhythmias have little clinical importance. However, other cardiac arrhythmias, such as sinus node dysfunction and ventricular tachycardia, may result in significant morbidity or mortality.

MECHANISMS — There are several mechanisms for arrhythmogenesis in the transplanted heart, with early postoperative arrhythmias resulting from different mechanisms than those occurring later. Surgical trauma to the sinoatrial and atrioventricular nodes, ischemia during preservation, surgical suture lines, and, over the long term, rejection and accelerated atherosclerosis may contribute to the formation of an arrhythmogenic substrate. As an example, one autopsy study of 18 hearts found that acute rejection involved the conduction system as severely as the myocardium [1]. With chronic rejection, there was often obstructive vasculopathy of the sinus node artery.

In occasional cases, severe rejection isolated to the conduction system with sparing of the rest of the myocardium occurs and presents as bradycardia with syncope [2].

In addition, the denervated donor heart has increased sensitivity to sympathetic amines, adenosine, and acetylcholine, which may contribute to both tachyarrhythmias and bradyarrhythmias [3-5]. The sympathetic effect may be presynaptic in origin; it is not due to increased beta receptor density [3,4].

Because of this increased sinus node sensitivity, adenosine should generally not be used (as it often used is in other patient populations) to slow the rate in supraventricular tachyarrhythmias to elucidate the underlying arrhythmia mechanism. Such use can result in prolonged bradycardia or a period of asystole. Cautious use of IV adenosine in selected pediatric and young adult transplant patients was well tolerated in one single center study [6].

SINUS RATE — In the denervated heart, the normal resting sinus rate is usually greater than 80 bpm and may exceed 100 bpm in hearts transplanted from young donors. The heart rate is higher than in normals because of the loss of vagal neural inputs, which have a negative chronotropic effect. (See "Sinus tachycardia: Evaluation and management".)

Partial reinnervation of cardiac sympathetic nerves after transplantation occurs in about one-third of patients at one year [7-10]. The process of reinnervation continues gradually for up to 15 years but is regionally heterogeneous [10,11]. Reinnervation of the sinus node is accompanied by partial restoration of the normal heart rate response to exercise [8,9].

Vagal innervation appears to be absent in the majority of patients for up to 96 months after transplant [12]. Vagal reinnervation may depend upon surgical technique; it occurs more commonly with bicaval compared with the standard biatrial surgery [13]. Standard biatrial surgery transects about 50 percent of sympathetic fibers, but most recipient vagus nerve trunks remain intact. As a result, there is a stimulus for sympathetic fiber, but not vagal fiber, regeneration. In contrast, bicaval surgery transects both sympathetic and parasympathetic fibers and regeneration may be stimulated in both branches.

Persistent post-transplant sinus tachycardia is associated with decreased long-term survival. The role of agents to reduce heart rate (beta blocker or ivabradine) in this setting has not been established. A preliminary observational study found that 2 year survival was higher in patients treated with ivabradine compared to patients treated with metoprolol [14]. Further study is required to determine the efficacy of these drugs in this setting.

SINUS NODE DYSFUNCTION

Prevalence and causes — Sinus node dysfunction (SND), which is usually manifested by a relative bradycardia, occurs in up to 50 percent of patients in the first several weeks following transplantation [15-17]. Although this early abnormality does not appear to affect mortality [18,19], sinus bradycardia may result in significant morbidity from decreased cardiac output. In a series of 1179 heart transplants (91 percent with biatrial technique) performed over 35 years, 11.5 percent required pacemaker implantation to treat bradycardia; 86 percent of patients requiring a pacemaker had SND [19]. Independent risk factors for pacemaker implantation were prolonged operative time and a biatrial anastomosis. (See "Sinus node dysfunction: Clinical manifestations, diagnosis, and evaluation" and "Sinus node dysfunction: Epidemiology, etiology, and natural history".)

In cardiac transplant recipients with SND, intact atrioventricular nodal function is usually present; thus, atrial pacing is often sufficient but usually delivered with a dual chamber pacemaker capable of ventricular backup pacing if needed [20]. Lead dislodgement during endomyocardial biopsy rarely occurs. (See "Permanent cardiac pacing: Overview of devices and indications".)

Potential causes of SND include ischemia during hypothermic preservation; surgical trauma to the sinus node, perinodal atrial tissue, or sinoatrial artery; pretransplant use of amiodarone; and immunologic processes such as rejection [17,21]. In one series, for example, patients who required permanent pacemakers for sinus bradycardia had a significantly higher prevalence of abnormal sinoatrial nodal arteries when compared to a control group of heart transplant recipients with normal sinus node function [22].

Surgical trauma to the sinoatrial artery can be avoided by performing a bicaval anastomosis rather than the standard biatrial anastomosis [19,23,24]; thus, the bicaval technique has become the most commonly used procedure in transplant centers [25]. This technique consists of total excision of the right atrium with a minimum cuff of left atrium remaining around the four pulmonary veins, followed by direct anastomoses of the donor and recipient vena cavae. It appears to be associated with a decreased incidence of SND [26-28]. In a prospective series of 70 orthotopic heart transplant recipients undergoing either a standard biatrial or a bicaval anastomosis, the incidence of SND, as determined by atrial pacing techniques, was much lower with bicaval anastomosis (5 versus 44 percent) [28]. This finding was confirmed in a United Network for Organ Sharing/Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (UNOS/OPTN) database analysis of 20,999 recipients indicating that those transplanted utilizing bicaval anastomosis had lesser need for pacemaker therapy and improved long-term survival [29].

Several studies have suggested correlation of bradycardia with the donor ischemic time [16,30,31]; however, in other series, the donor ischemic time was not significantly different for orthotopic heart transplant recipients who required implantation of a permanent pacemaker for sinus bradycardia compared with those without this complication [19,22].

A separate UNOS/OPTN database analysis of 35,987 patients reported a 10.9 percent incidence of pacemaker-requiring bradyarrhythmias [32]. A biatrial anastomosis as well as greater recipient and donor age were the only factors associated with increased permanent pacemaker requirement. Pacemaker implantation had no adverse effect on survival; in fact, survival was better in pacemaker recipients as compared to those not receiving a pacemaker.

Treatment of sinus bradycardia — Normalization of post-transplant SND and bradyarrhythmias occurs spontaneously in up to 55 percent of patients during the first three postoperative months and a conservative strategy is reasonable in the early postoperative period [15].

The administration of theophylline [33,34] terbutaline [35], or albuterol has been advocated to increase the sinus rate and avoid implantation of a permanent pacemaker during the first three postoperative months. Studies comparing the acute effects of these agents, however, have demonstrated only a modest shortening of the sinus node cycle length and recovery time, with incomplete correction of the underlying sinus node abnormality [36,37]. Thus, these drugs are probably best reserved for patients with only mild or moderate SND or those with postoperative bradycardia due to prior amiodarone use.

Atropine is not an effective treatment for bradycardia in the transplanted heart when vagal innervation is absent. Intravenous isoproterenol is suggested in the unlikely event that emergency treatment of bradycardia is needed in the heart transplant patient who does not have pacemaker wires in place.

Patients with more severe bradycardia that persists for more than two weeks after transplantation usually require a permanent pacemaker; a rate-responsive dual chamber or atrial pacemaker implanted in the donor right atrium (if intact atrioventricular conduction is present) is recommended [38]. (See "Modes of cardiac pacing: Nomenclature and selection".)

The role of biventricular pacing is not known in cardiac transplant recipients who fulfill the criteria used for such therapy in nontransplant patients. Successful implementation of cardiac resynchronization therapy in heart transplant patients has been reported [39]. (See "Cardiac resynchronization therapy in heart failure: Indications and choice of system".)

CONDUCTION DISTURBANCES — The most common conduction abnormality following orthotopic heart transplant is a new right bundle branch delay not present on the donor electrocardiogram (ECG) prior to transplantation. This can occur in up to 70 percent of patients and is usually manifest as an incomplete right bundle branch block present immediately postoperatively [40]. The conduction abnormality may persist and, in one study, was associated with prolonged donor ischemic time and multiple episodes of rejection [41]. These findings were corroborated in a later report in which early RBBB was correlated with transpulmonary gradient before orthotopic heart transplant and late occurrence was correlated with higher rejection scores [42]. The incidence of RBBB was higher with biatrial versus bicaval anastomosis.

Potential mechanisms for later right bundle branch block include right ventricular hypertrophy from elevated pulmonary pressures or damage to the right bundle from endomyocardial biopsy sampling of the right ventricular septal wall. (See "Right bundle branch block".)

Although the transplanted heart is denervated, atrioventricular (AV) nodal function is intact and the ability of the AV node to adapt to exercise with a shortening of the PR interval is retained since it remains sensitive to circulating catecholamines [43]. High grade AV block is uncommon, particularly in the early postoperative period [16]. Although pacemaker implantation is performed in approximately 10 to 15 percent of cardiac transplant recipients, AV block accounts for less than 20 percent of these cases [22,44,45] and median time to pacemaker implantation is later for AV block than for sinus node dysfunction (eg, 1511 versus 27 days [19]). The late development of heart block has been associated with an increase in mortality, often from transplant arteriopathy [46]. (See "Heart transplantation: Clinical manifestations, diagnosis, and prognosis of cardiac allograft vasculopathy".)

Indications for pacemaker placement are the same as for other patients with symptomatic bradyarrhythmias or chronotropic incompetence that are not expected to resolve. Patients who undergo bicaval cardiac transplants are less likely to require permanent cardiac pacing than those who undergo biatrial cardiac transplants [47] (see "Permanent cardiac pacing: Overview of devices and indications").

SUPRAVENTRICULAR ARRHYTHMIAS

Atrial premature beats — Isolated premature atrial complex (PAC; also referred to a premature atrial beat, premature supraventricular complex, or premature supraventricular beat)

and nonsustained atrial dysrhythmias are common in the early postoperative period, occurring in up to 76 percent of patients [16,48,49]. (See "Supraventricular premature beats".) The prevalence is lower at long-term follow-up, decreasing from 55 percent in the early postoperative period to 30 percent at mean of 24 months after transplantation in one report [48]. There are conflicting data on whether PACs occur with increased frequency during episodes of rejection [49,50].

Atrial fibrillation or flutter — Reports of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) or atrial flutter following cardiac transplantation have variably included perioperative and late arrhythmia. Atrial fibrillation has been described in 10 to 24 percent of patients [51-53], while atrial flutter has been described in 12 to 15 percent [49,53]. These arrhythmias often occur in the absence of significant rejection, although this has not been found in all reports [49,51,52,54].

Most episodes of AF occur within the first 30 to 60 days after transplantation with incidence ranging from 5 to 11 percent in large, single center experiences. This relatively low rate, compared to typical post-pericardiectomy AF incidence is postulated to be due to surgical pulmonary vein isolation and cardiac denervation, which occurs with the heart transplantation surgery. Patients treated with long-term amiodarone therapy prior to heart transplantation have less early postoperative atrial fibrillation with no adverse impact on mortality [55]. Late AF develops in 5 to 10 percent of patients and is associated with decrease in systolic function and increased overall mortality [51,53,56,57]. Atrial flutter may be a more common late arrhythmia [49].

Atrial flutter that occurs in the absence of rejection is a result of a macroreentrant circuit in a counterclockwise direction around the tricuspid ring, similar to that seen in typical atrial flutter in normal hearts [58-60]. This circuit includes the isthmus between the tricuspid valve and the inferior vena cava, referred to as the cavotricuspid isthmus. (See "Electrocardiographic and electrophysiologic features of atrial flutter".)

The cause of atrial dysrhythmias during rejection is not known. It is possible that the patchy nature of rejection results in heterogeneous impairment of atrial conduction and refractoriness, allowing for the formation of multiple microreentrant circuits. In addition, atrial hemodynamics may be altered by the reduced ventricular function and compliance that occur during rejection. (See "The electrocardiogram in atrial fibrillation".)

Treatment of these arrhythmias includes control of the ventricular response rate and, if warranted, immunosuppressive therapy for rejection. Overdrive pacing can be performed at the time of myocardial biopsy with more than a 90 percent success in terminating atrial flutter [54].

There are case reports and small series of successful radiofrequency ablation of atrial flutter in transplanted hearts [59,60]. Interestingly, the usual suture line between the donor and recipient heart lies within the cavo-tricuspid isthmus, which, as noted above, is a critical component of the circuit of typical atrial flutter. In a series of six cardiac transplant recipients undergoing cardiac electrophysiologic studies (EPS) for atrial flutter, only the tissue below the suture line from the donor heart was part of the macroreentrant circuit. In all of these cases, ablation from the tricuspid annulus to the suture line, rather than all the way to the inferior vena cava (IVC), successfully eliminated atrial flutter [60]. Macroreentry based on the gaps in the atrial anastomosis line and microreentrant/focal atrial tachycardias successfully treated with radiofrequency ablation have been described [61,62]. (See "Restoration of sinus rhythm in atrial flutter".)

Heart transplant guidelines do not discuss anticoagulation in the setting of heart transplant patients with atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter. Standard guidelines for anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter should be followed in heart transplant patients. (See "Atrial fibrillation in adults: Use of oral anticoagulants".)

Supraventricular tachycardias — A variety of supraventricular arrhythmias can occur in orthotopic heart transplant recipients, including atrioventricular (AV) reentrant tachycardia involving a concealed AV bypass tract [63-65], Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome [66,67], and sustained atrial tachycardias [52,68]. Radiofrequency catheter ablation has been performed in many of these patients with success and complication rates similar to nontransplant recipients [65,67,68]. (See "Narrow QRS complex tachycardias: Clinical manifestations, diagnosis, and evaluation" and "Overview of catheter ablation of cardiac arrhythmias", section on 'Introduction'.)

Interaction of diltiazem with immunosuppressive agents — Clinicians should be aware of drug interaction between diltiazem and immunosuppressive agents. Intravenous diltiazem is often used to control ventricular rates in patients with SVTs and/or atrial fibrillation. Diltiazem inhibits CYP3A, which metabolizes tacrolimus and cyclosporine. Consequently, heart transplant patients receiving diltiazem often have elevated tacrolimus or cyclosporine levels which can result in renal dysfunction [69].

VENTRICULAR ARRHYTHMIAS

Ventricular premature beats and nonsustained ventricular tachycardia — Ventricular premature beats (VPBs) are common in the early post-transplant period, occurring in up to 100 percent of patients [16,49]. (See "Premature ventricular complexes: Clinical presentation and diagnostic evaluation".) The incidence of VPBs decreases after the early postoperative period and does not appear to be associated with rejection or other factors.

The frequency of nonsustained ventricular tachycardia (NSVT) also decreases over time [48]. However, some studies have demonstrated an association with both rejection and coronary atherosclerosis (cardiac allograft vasculopathy) [16,70]. In one small series, for example, complex ventricular ectopy (multifocal VPBs and couplets) occurring in the late transplant period was also more prevalent in patients with severe cardiac allograft vasculopathy [50]. (See "Heart transplantation: Clinical manifestations, diagnosis, and prognosis of cardiac allograft vasculopathy".)

Sustained ventricular arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death — Standard recommendations for ICD therapy apply to cardiac transplant recipients. Antiarrhythmic drug therapy is based on safety, tolerability, and clinical experience as limited published evidence is available for these drugs in cardiac transplant recipients. (See "Primary prevention of sudden cardiac death in patients with cardiomyopathy and heart failure with reduced LVEF" and "Secondary prevention of sudden cardiac death in heart failure and cardiomyopathy" and "Sustained monomorphic ventricular tachycardia in patients with structural heart disease: Treatment and prognosis".)

Sustained ventricular arrhythmias are uncommon in the donor heart; when they occur, they are usually associated with either severe transplant cardiac allograft vasculopathy or allograft rejection [71]. Ventricular fibrillation has been reported in patients hospitalized for severe allograft rejection [72,73], while autopsy studies of patients with sudden cardiac death have demonstrated a high prevalence of severe cardiac allograft vasculopathy or recent myocardial infarctions [72,74]. Although ventricular tachyarrhythmias are thought to be the mode of sudden cardiac death, severe bradycardic events as well as electromechanical dissociation may also occur due to advanced atherosclerosis [75].

Limited outcome data exist for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy (ICD) in heart transplant recipients. ICD therapy has been reported to effectively terminate ventricular arrhythmias in transplanted patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction, severe allograft vasculopathy, or history of cardiac arrest [76]. The effect of ICD therapy on long-term survival and quality of life in this population is not known.

SOCIETY GUIDELINE LINKS — Links to society and government-sponsored guidelines from selected countries and regions around the world are provided separately. (See "Society guideline links: Arrhythmias in adults".)

INFORMATION FOR PATIENTS — UpToDate offers two types of patient education materials, “The Basics” and “Beyond the Basics.” The Basics patient education pieces are written in plain language, at the 5^th to 6^th grade reading level, and they answer the four or five key questions a patient might have about a given condition. These articles are best for patients who want a general overview and who prefer short, easy-to-read materials. Beyond the Basics patient education pieces are longer, more sophisticated, and more detailed. These articles are written at the 10^th to 12^th grade reading level and are best for patients who want in-depth information and are comfortable with some medical jargon.

Here are the patient education articles that are relevant to this topic. We encourage you to print or e-mail these topics to your patients. (You can also locate patient education articles on a variety of subjects by searching on “patient info” and the keyword(s) of interest.)

●Beyond the Basics topic (see "Patient education: Heart transplantation (Beyond the Basics)")

SUMMARY — While most arrhythmias after orthotopic heart transplantation are benign, there are several clinical associations with which the physician must be familiar:

●Early postoperative bradyarrhythmias due to sinus node dysfunction (SND) are probably caused by surgical trauma to the sinoatrial node or its blood supply and can partly be avoided using a bicaval anastomosis technique. (See 'Sinus node dysfunction' above.)

●Atropine is not an effective treatment for bradycardia when vagal innervation is absent; intravenous isoproterenol is suggested in the unlikely event that emergency treatment of bradycardia is needed in the heart transplant patient without pacemaker wires in place. (See 'Treatment of sinus bradycardia' above.)

●Sustained atrial flutter and fibrillation are commonly associated with allograft rejection. Thus, the presence of these arrhythmias should prompt a search for acute rejection by endomyocardial biopsy. Empiric steroid therapy should be considered in such patients prior to return of the biopsy results. Adenosine should not be used to try to elucidate the mechanism of supraventricular tachyarrhythmias since it can result in transient, but significant, bradyarrhythmias. (See 'Atrial fibrillation or flutter' above and "Heart transplantation in adults: Treatment of rejection".)

●Complex ventricular ectopy or atrioventricular block may be caused by either acute rejection or severe cardiac allograft vasculopathy. Affected patients should undergo endomyocardial biopsy followed, if rejection is not present, by coronary angiography to diagnose cardiac allograft vasculopathy. (See 'Ventricular arrhythmias' above and 'Conduction disturbances' above and "Heart transplantation: Clinical manifestations, diagnosis, and prognosis of cardiac allograft vasculopathy".)

●Insertion of a permanent pacemaker should be considered in patients with significant bradyarrhythmias, either from SND or high grade atrioventricular (AV) block, that are associated with decreased cardiac output and occur in the absence of acute rejection. (See 'Treatment of sinus bradycardia' above and 'Conduction disturbances' above.)

●Patients with frequent and symptomatic supraventricular tachycardia may be treated with radiofrequency catheter ablation. (See 'Supraventricular tachycardias' above.)

●Standard recommendations for ICD therapy apply to cardiac transplant recipients. Antiarrhythmic drug therapy is based on safety, tolerability, and clinical experience as limited published evidence is available for these drugs in cardiac transplant recipients. (See 'Ventricular arrhythmias' above and "Primary prevention of sudden cardiac death in patients with cardiomyopathy and heart failure with reduced LVEF" and "Secondary prevention of sudden cardiac death in heart failure and cardiomyopathy" and "Sustained monomorphic ventricular tachycardia in patients with structural heart disease: Treatment and prognosis".)

Calzolari V, Angelini A, Basso C, et al. Histologic findings in the conduction system after cardiac transplantation and correlation with electrocardiographic findings. Am J Cardiol 1999; 84:756.
Knight CS, Tallaj JA, Rayburn BK, et al. Bradycardia and syncope as a presentation of cardiac allograft rejection involving the conducting system. Cardiovasc Pathol 2010; 19:117.
Cannom DS, Rider AK, Stinson EB, Harrison DC. Electrophysiologic studies in the denervated transplanted human heart. II. Response to norepinephrine, isoproterenol and propranolol. Am J Cardiol 1975; 36:859.
Yusuf S, Theodoropoulos S, Mathias CJ, et al. Increased sensitivity of the denervated transplanted human heart to isoprenaline both before and after beta-adrenergic blockade. Circulation 1987; 75:696.
Ellenbogen KA, Thames MD, DiMarco JP, et al. Electrophysiological effects of adenosine in the transplanted human heart. Evidence of supersensitivity. Circulation 1990; 81:821.
Flyer JN, Zuckerman WA, Richmond ME, et al. Prospective Study of Adenosine on Atrioventricular Nodal Conduction in Pediatric and Young Adult Patients After Heart Transplantation. Circulation 2017; 135:2485.
Burke MN, McGinn AL, Homans DC, et al. Evidence for functional sympathetic reinnervation of left ventricle and coronary arteries after orthotopic cardiac transplantation in humans. Circulation 1995; 91:72.
Squires RW, Leung TC, Cyr NS, et al. Partial normalization of the heart rate response to exercise after cardiac transplantation: frequency and relationship to exercise capacity. Mayo Clin Proc 2002; 77:1295.
Wilson RF, Johnson TH, Haidet GC, et al. Sympathetic reinnervation of the sinus node and exercise hemodynamics after cardiac transplantation. Circulation 2000; 101:2727.
Gallego-Page JC, Segovia J, Alonso-Pulpón L, et al. Re-innervation after heart transplantation: a multidisciplinary study. J Heart Lung Transplant 2004; 23:674.
Bengel FM, Ueberfuhr P, Ziegler SI, et al. Serial assessment of sympathetic reinnervation after orthotopic heart transplantation. A longitudinal study using PET and C-11 hydroxyephedrine. Circulation 1999; 99:1866.
Arrowood JA, Minisi AJ, Goudreau E, et al. Absence of parasympathetic control of heart rate after human orthotopic cardiac transplantation. Circulation 1997; 96:3492.
Bernardi L, Valenti C, Wdowczyck-Szulc J, et al. Influence of type of surgery on the occurrence of parasympathetic reinnervation after cardiac transplantation. Circulation 1998; 97:1368.
Rivinius R, Helmschrott M, Ruhparwar A, et al. Control of cardiac chronotropic function in patients after heart transplantation: effects of ivabradine and metoprolol succinate on resting heart rate in the denervated heart. Clin Res Cardiol 2018; 107:138.
Heinz G, Hirschl M, Buxbaum P, et al. Sinus node dysfunction after orthotopic cardiac transplantation: postoperative incidence and long-term implications. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 1992; 15:731.
Jacquet L, Ziady G, Stein K, et al. Cardiac rhythm disturbances early after orthotopic heart transplantation: prevalence and clinical importance of the observed abnormalities. J Am Coll Cardiol 1990; 16:832.
Mackintosh AF, Carmichael DJ, Wren C, et al. Sinus node function in first three weeks after cardiac transplantation. Br Heart J 1982; 48:584.
Heinz G, Kratochwill C, Koller-Strametz J, et al. Benign prognosis of early sinus node dysfunction after orthotopic cardiac transplantation. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 1998; 21:422.
Wellmann P, Herrmann FE, Hagl C, Juchem G. A Single Center Study of 1,179 Heart Transplant Patients-Factors Affecting Pacemaker Implantation. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2017; 40:247.
Woodard DA, Conti JB, Mills RM Jr, et al. Permanent atrial pacing in cardiac transplant patients. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 1997; 20:2398.
Mason JW, Harrison DC. Electrophysiology and electropharmacology of the transplanted human heart. In: Cardiac Arrhythmias: Electrophysiology, Diagnosis and Management, Narula OS (Ed), Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore 1979. p.66.
DiBiase A, Tse TM, Schnittger I, et al. Frequency and mechanism of bradycardia in cardiac transplant recipients and need for pacemakers. Am J Cardiol 1991; 67:1385.
Dreyfus G, Jebara V, Mihaileanu S, Carpentier AF. Total orthotopic heart transplantation: an alternative to the standard technique. Ann Thorac Surg 1991; 52:1181.
Sarsam MA, Campbell CS, Yonan NA, et al. An alternative surgical technique in orthotopic cardiac transplantation. J Card Surg 1993; 8:344.
Aziz TM, Burgess MI, El-Gamel A, et al. Orthotopic cardiac transplantation technique: a survey of current practice. Ann Thorac Surg 1999; 68:1242.
Deleuze PH, Benvenuti C, Mazzucotelli JP, et al. Orthotopic cardiac transplantation with direct caval anastomosis: is it the optimal procedure? J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1995; 109:731.
el Gamel A, Yonan NA, Grant S, et al. Orthotopic cardiac transplantation: a comparison of standard and bicaval Wythenshawe techniques. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1995; 109:721.
Rothman SA, Jeevanandam V, Combs WG, et al. Eliminating bradyarrhythmias after orthotopic heart transplantation. Circulation 1996; 94:II278.
Davies RR, Russo MJ, Morgan JA, et al. Standard versus bicaval techniques for orthotopic heart transplantation: an analysis of the United Network for Organ Sharing database. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2010; 140:700.
Heinz G, Ohner T, Laufer G, et al. Demographic and perioperative factors associated with initial and prolonged sinus node dysfunction after orthotopic heart transplantation. The impact of ischemic time. Transplantation 1991; 51:1217.
Miyamoto Y, Curtiss EI, Kormos RL, et al. Bradyarrhythmia after heart transplantation. Incidence, time course, and outcome. Circulation 1990; 82:IV313.
Cantillon DJ, Tarakji KG, Hu T, et al. Long-term outcomes and clinical predictors for pacemaker-requiring bradyarrhythmias after cardiac transplantation: analysis of the UNOS/OPTN cardiac transplant database. Heart Rhythm 2010; 7:1567.
Redmond JM, Zehr KJ, Gillinov MA, et al. Use of theophylline for treatment of prolonged sinus node dysfunction in human orthotopic heart transplantation. J Heart Lung Transplant 1993; 12:133.
Ellenbogen KA, Szentpetery S, Katz MR. Reversibility of prolonged chronotropic dysfunction with theophylline following orthotopic cardiac transplantation. Am Heart J 1988; 116:202.
Cook LS, Will KR, Moran J. Treatment of junctional rhythm after heart transplantation with terbutaline. J Heart Transplant 1989; 8:342.
Rothman SA, Jeevanandam V, Seeber CP, et al. Electrophysiologic effects of intravenous aminophylline in heart transplant recipients with sinus node dysfunction. J Heart Lung Transplant 1995; 14:429.
Rothman SA, Jeevanandam V, Hsia H, et al. A comparison of the electrophysiologic effects of aminophylline and terbutaline in heart transplant recipients with sinus node dysfunction (abstract). Circulation 1995; 92(Suppl 1):I.
Melton IC, Gilligan DM, Wood MA, Ellenbogen KA. Optimal cardiac pacing after heart transplantation. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 1999; 22:1510.
Mariani JA, McDonald MA, Nanthakumar K, et al. Cardiac resynchronization therapy after atrioventricular node ablation for rapid atrial fibrillation in a heart transplant recipient with late allograft dysfunction. J Heart Lung Transplant 2010; 29:704.
Villa AE, de Marchena EJ, Myerburg RJ, Castellanos A. Comparisons of paired orthotopic cardiac transplant donor and recipient electrocardiograms. Am Heart J 1994; 127:70.
Leonelli FM, Pacifico A, Young JB. Frequency and significance of conduction defects early after orthotopic heart transplantation. Am J Cardiol 1994; 73:175.
Ferretto S, Tafciu E, Giuliani I, et al. Interventricular conduction disorders after orthotopic heart transplantation: risk factors and clinical relevance. Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol 2017; 22.
Koller-Strametz J, Kratochwill C, Grabenwöger M, et al. PR interval adaptation in the denervated transplanted heart. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 1997; 20:1247.
Heinz G, Kratochwill C, Hirschl M, et al. Normal AV node function in patients with sinus node dysfunction after cardiac transplantation. J Card Surg 1993; 8:417.
Markewitz A, Schmoeckel M, Nollert G, et al. Long-term results of pacemaker therapy after orthotopic heart transplantation. J Card Surg 1993; 8:411.
Ruben S, Hsia H, Mather P, et al. Etiology and prognostic implications of post-transplant conduction system disease (abstract). J Heart Lung Transplant 1996; 15:S60.
Weiss ES, Nwakanma LU, Russell SB, et al. Outcomes in bicaval versus biatrial techniques in heart transplantation: an analysis of the UNOS database. J Heart Lung Transplant 2008; 27:178.
Little RE, Kay GN, Epstein AE, et al. Arrhythmias after orthotopic cardiac transplantation. Prevalence and determinants during initial hospitalization and late follow-up. Circulation 1989; 80:III140.
Scott CD, Dark JH, McComb JM. Arrhythmias after cardiac transplantation. Am J Cardiol 1992; 70:1061.
Romhilt DW, Doyle M, Sagar KB, et al. Prevalence and significance of arrhythmias in long-term survivors of cardiac transplantation. Circulation 1982; 66:I219.
Creswell LL, Schuessler RB, Rosenbloom M, Cox JL. Hazards of postoperative atrial arrhythmias. Ann Thorac Surg 1993; 56:539.
Pavri BB, O'Nunain SS, Newell JB, et al. Prevalence and prognostic significance of atrial arrhythmias after orthotopic cardiac transplantation. J Am Coll Cardiol 1995; 25:1673.
Ahmari SA, Bunch TJ, Chandra A, et al. Prevalence, pathophysiology, and clinical significance of post-heart transplant atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter. J Heart Lung Transplant 2006; 25:53.
Macdonald P, Hackworthy R, Keogh A, et al. Atrial overdrive pacing for reversion of atrial flutter after heart transplantation. J Heart Lung Transplant 1991; 10:731.
Rivinius R, Helmschrott M, Ruhparwar A, et al. Long-term use of amiodarone before heart transplantation significantly reduces early post-transplant atrial fibrillation and is not associated with increased mortality after heart transplantation. Drug Des Devel Ther 2016; 10:677.
Cohn WE, Gregoric ID, Radovancevic B, et al. Atrial fibrillation after cardiac transplantation: experience in 498 consecutive cases. Ann Thorac Surg 2008; 85:56.
Dasari TW, Pavlovic-Surjancev B, Patel N, et al. Incidence, risk factors, and clinical outcomes of atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter after heart transplantation. Am J Cardiol 2010; 106:737.
Arenal A, Almendral J, Muñoz R, et al. Mechanism and location of atrial flutter in transplanted hearts: observations during transient entrainment from distant sites. J Am Coll Cardiol 1997; 30:539.
Pinski SL, Bredikis AJ, Winkel E, Trohman RG. Radiofrequency catheter ablation of atrial flutter after orthotopic heart transplantation: insights into the redefined critical isthmus. J Heart Lung Transplant 1999; 18:292.
Marine JE, Schuger CD, Bogun F, et al. Mechanism of atrial flutter occurring late after orthotopic heart transplantation with atrio-atrial anastomosis. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2005; 28:412.
Li YG, Grönefeld G, Israel C, et al. Radiofrequency catheter ablation in patients with symptomatic atrial flutter/tachycardia after orthotopic heart transplantation. Chin Med J (Engl) 2006; 119:2036.
Nof E, Stevenson WG, Epstein LM, et al. Catheter ablation of atrial arrhythmias after cardiac transplantation: findings at EP study utility of 3-D mapping and outcomes. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2013; 24:498.
Goy JJ, Kappenberger L, Turina M. Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome after transplantation of the heart. Br Heart J 1989; 61:368.
Gallay P, Albat B, Thevenet A, Grolleau R. Direct current catheter ablation of an accessory pathway in a recipient with refractory reciprocal tachycardia. J Heart Lung Transplant 1992; 11:442.
Neuzner J, Friedl A, Pitschner HF. Radiofrequency catheter ablation of a concealed accessory atrioventricular pathway after heart transplantation. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 1994; 17:1778.
Thompson E, Steinhaus D, Long N, Borkon AM. Preexcitation syndrome in a donor heart. J Heart Transplant 1989; 8:177.
Rothman SA, Hsia HH, Bove AA, et al. Radiofrequency ablation of Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome in a donor heart after orthotopic heart transplantation. J Heart Lung Transplant 1994; 13:905.
Ott P, Kelly PA, Mann DE, et al. Tachycardia-induced cardiomyopathy in a cardiac transplant recipient: treatment with radiofrequency catheter ablation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 1995; 6:391.
Hebert MF, Lam AY. Diltiazem increases tacrolimus concentrations. Ann Pharmacother 1999; 33:680.
Park JK, Hsu DT, Hordof AJ, Addonizio LJ. Arrhythmias in pediatric heart transplant recipients: prevalence and association with death, coronary artery disease, and rejection. J Heart Lung Transplant 1993; 12:956.
Alexopoulos D, Yusuf S, Bostock J, et al. Ventricular arrhythmias in long term survivors of orthotopic and heterotopic cardiac transplantation. Br Heart J 1988; 59:648.
Berke DK, Graham AF, Schroeder JS, Harrison DC. Arrhythmias in the denervated transplanted human heart. Circulation 1973; 48:III112.
de Jonge N, Jambroes G, Lahpor JR, Woolley SR. Ventricular fibrillation during acute rejection after heart transplantation. J Heart Lung Transplant 1992; 11:797.
Uretsky BF, Kormos RL, Zerbe TR, et al. Cardiac events after heart transplantation: incidence and predictive value of coronary arteriography. J Heart Lung Transplant 1992; 11:S45.
Grinstead WC, Smart FW, Pratt CM, et al. Sudden death caused by bradycardia and asystole in a heart transplant patient with coronary arteriopathy. J Heart Lung Transplant 1991; 10:931.
Tsai VW, Cooper J, Garan H, et al. The efficacy of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in heart transplant recipients: results from a multicenter registry. Circ Heart Fail 2009; 2:197.

Topic 3518 Version 25.0

خرید پکیج

Heart transplantation in adults: Arrhythmias

References