Why the study?
Infection is a serious complication of CIED therapy, but studies evaluating the efficacy and number needed to treat for an antibacterial envelope in high-risk populations are limited.
Does an antibacterial envelope reduce local infection in patients undergoing CIED implantation?
Does an antibacterial envelope reduce local infection in patients undergoing CIED implantation?
The use of an antibacterial envelope during CIED implantation significantly reduces local infections, particularly in high-risk patients identified by a PADIT score >7.
Associated with fewer local CIED infections; hypothesis-generating and requires randomized confirmation before practice change.
AIMS: Infection is a serious complication of cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) therapy. An antibiotic-eluting absorbable envelope has been developed to reduce the infection rate, but studies investigating the efficacy and a reasonable number needed to treat in high-risk populations for infections are limited. METHODS AND RESULTS: One hundred and forty-four patients undergoing CIED implantation who received the antibacterial envelope were compared with a matched cohort of 382 CIED patients from our institution. The primary outcome was the occurrence of local infection, and secondary outcomes were any CIED-related local or systemic infections, including endocarditis, and all-cause mortality. The results were stratified by a risk score for CIED infection, PADIT. The envelope group had a higher PADIT score, 5.9 ± 3.1 vs. 3.9 ± 3.0 (P < 0.0001). For the primary endpoint, no local infections occurred in the envelope group, compared with 2.6% in the control group (P = 0.04), with a more pronounced difference in the stratum with a high (>7 points) PADIT score, 0 vs. 9.9% (P = 0.01). The total CIED-related infections were similar between groups, 6.3% compared with 5.0% (P = 0.567). Mortality after 1600 days of follow-up did not differ between groups, 22.9 vs. 26.4%, P = 0.475. CONCLUSION: Our study confirms the clinical efficacy of an antibacterial envelope in the prevention of local CIED infection in patients with a higher risk according to the PADIT score. In an effort to improve cost-benefit ratios, ration of use guided by the PADIT score is advocated. Further prospective randomized studies in high-risk populations are called for.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chaudhry et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: