Key result
A simplified draping method using a single adhesive drape for pacing procedures resulted in a significantly lower overall infection rate compared to traditional draping (0.4% vs 5.3%, P=0.014).
Why the study?
Does a simplified draping method using a single adhesive drape prevent infective complications in pacing procedures compared to traditional draping?
Observational (n=364)
No
Does a simplified draping method using a single adhesive drape prevent infective complications in pacing procedures compared to traditional draping?
Absolute Event Rate: 0.4% vs 5.3%
p-value: p=0.014
A simplified single-drape method for pacing procedures is feasible and associated with a low risk of infective complications compared to traditional draping.
Simplified single-drape method was associated with lower pacing infection rates; hypothesis-generating and requires randomized confirmation before practice change.
AIMS: Traditional draping for pacing procedures is time-consuming. We evaluated prospectively the safety of a simplified method using a single adhesive drape intended for use in cardiac catheterization. METHODS AND RESULTS: A single disposable adhesive drape was used in each of 250 consecutive pacing procedures by the same operator including 200 device implants and 50 revision procedures. We compared the results with those of 114 procedures performed in the same cardiac catheterization laboratory by three other operators using traditional draping methods for most cases. In the study group, no wound or pacemaker pocket infection, device erosion, or endocarditis was observed within the first 6 months after the procedure (0%, 95% CI 0-1.2%). One suspected infection occurred at 10 months (0.4%, 95% CI 0.1-2.2%). In the control group, there were two cases of early infection or suspected infection (2 of 114 procedures, 1.8%, 95% CI 0.27-6.1%), four cases of confirmed or suspected infection more than 6 months after the procedure giving an overall infection rate (6 of 114, 5.3%, 95% CI 2.1-11.0%) significantly higher than in the study group (P = 0.014, Fisher's exact test). CONCLUSION: A simplified draping method involving a single adhesive fenestrated drape can be used for pacemaker or ICD implantation or revision procedures without an excessively elevated risk of infective complications.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gallagher et al. (2007) conducted an observational in Pacing procedures (pacemaker or ICD implantation or revision) (n=364). Simplified draping method using a single disposable adhesive drape vs. Traditional draping methods was evaluated on Overall infection rate (wound or pacemaker pocket infection, device erosion, or endocarditis) (p=0.014). A simplified draping method using a single adhesive drape for pacing procedures resulted in a significantly lower overall infection rate compared to traditional draping (0.4% vs 5.3%, P=0.014).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: