Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Infections in Patients with Renal Insufficiency: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Figures

• 

  Figure 1. Study selection process according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-AnalysEs statement.

• 

  Figure 2. Forest plots of rates of cardiac implantable device infection in (a) all renal insufficiency, (b) chronic kidney disease, and (c) end-stage renal disease. Ayoub et al. [26], Calderón-Parra et al. [28], Charytan et al. [29], Chen et al. [30], Ito et al. [31], Jeong et al. [32], Krahn et al. [40], Lin et al. [33], Modi et al. [1], Olsen et al. [34], Romeyer-Bouchard et al. [36], and Tompkins et al. [37]. Abbreviation: CI, confidence interval.

• 

  Figure 3. Forest plots of the risk of cardiac implantable device infection in (a) chronic kidney disease and (b) end-stage renal disease. Ayoub et al. [26], Bloom et al. [8], Buiten et al. [27], Calderón-Parra et al. [28], Imberti et al. [39], Lin et al. [33], and Romeyer-Bouchard et al. [36], Krahn et al. [40]. Abbreviation: CI, confidence interval.

• 

  Figure 4. Forest plots of mortality in end-stage renal disease patients with cardiac implantable device infection. Ayoub et al. [26], Chen et al. [30], Imberti et al. [39], Krahn et al. [40], Lin et al. [33], Modi et al. [1], and Opelami et al. [35]. Abbreviation: CI, confidence interval.

• 

  Figure 5. Analysis of publication bias based on funnel plot results. Egger’s test for a regression intercept gave a 1-tailed p-value of 0.239, indicating no publication bias. (The intercept (B0) is −8.20, 95% confidence interval (−32.304 and 15.904), with t = 0.725, df = 15).