Incidence and risk factors of pacemaker pocket infection – an observational study

Q: What is the clinical evidence from this study?

Study design: Observational. Population: Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation (n=716). Intervention: Permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation. Primary outcome: Incidence of pacemaker pocket infection (PPMI).

Manish Kapoor; Arun Kumar Gunasekaran; Wihiwot Valarie Lyngdoh; Reuben Lamiaki Kynta; Pinak Pani Das

doi:10.1016/j.ihj.2025.05.009

May 25, 2025Indian Heart JournalOpen Access

Incidence and risk factors of pacemaker pocket infection – an observational study

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Share

Key result

Permanent pacemaker implants carry a ~2% pocket infection risk, driven mostly by culture-negative cases.

n=716

Why the study?

The study was conducted to examine indications for PPM implantation, risk factors, demographics, and microbiological profiles of PPM infections.

What is the incidence and microbiological profile of pacemaker pocket infections in adult patients undergoing CIED implantation?

Study Design

Type

Observational (n=716)

Multicenter

No

Structured PICO

What is the incidence and microbiological profile of pacemaker pocket infections in adult patients undergoing CIED implantation?

P

Population

716 adult patients (≥18 years old) who underwent Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device (CIED) implantation.

I

Intervention

Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device (CIED) implantation (37.7% single-chamber, 52.8% double-chamber).

O

Outcome

Incidence of pacemaker pocket infections (PPMI).safety

Limitations

Retrospective analysis from a single centre
Patients with ICDs and CRTD/CRTPs were excluded
Culture for fastidious organisms was not done
Potential loss to follow up after device implantation

Ask about this paper

Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.

Implication

Pacemaker pocket infections occurred in 2.09% of CIED implantations, predominantly presenting as culture-negative or MRSA infections.

Abstract

This retrospective, hospital-based observational study was aimed to examine the indications for PPM implantation, risk factors, demographics, and microbiological profiles of PPM infections (PPMI). The study included patients presenting with local inflammatory signs and excluded those under 18 years old. Of the 716 patients who underwent Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device (CIED) implantation, 37.7 % received single-chamber devices and 52.8 % received double-chamber devices. PPMI was identified in 15 patients (2.09 %), with infections more prevalent in devices implanted over 12 months prior. Diabetes (36.11 %) and hypertension (32.56 %) were the most common comorbidities. Culture-negative infections (53.33 %) predominated, followed by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) (33.33 %).

Discussion

No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.

Cite This Study

Kapoor et al. (2025) conducted an observational in Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation (n=716). Permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation was evaluated on Incidence of pacemaker pocket infection (PPMI). Permanent pacemaker pocket infection occurred in 2.09% of patients following device implantation, with culture-negative infections being the most prevalent.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a07b5f915d371b388386c92 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ihj.2025.05.009

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Share

Incidence and risk factors of pacemaker pocket infection – an observational study

Study Design

Structured PICO

Limitations

Ask about this paper

Implication

Abstract

Discussion

Cite This Study

Incidence and risk factors of pacemaker pocket infection – an observational study

Study Design

Structured PICO

Limitations

Ask about this paper

Implication

Abstract

Discussion

Cite This Study

Keep reading

Keep reading