Key result
A modified plastic surgical technique for cardiac device wound closure resulted in 0 device infections and 0 wound dehiscences over a mean follow-up of 15 months.
Why the study?
Does a modified plastic surgical technique for wound closure prevent infection and improve cosmetic outcomes in patients undergoing cardiac device implantation?
Observational (n=124)
No
Does a modified plastic surgical technique for wound closure prevent infection and improve cosmetic outcomes in patients undergoing cardiac device implantation?
A modified plastic surgical technique for cardiac device wound closure resulted in no infections or wound dehiscences and acceptable cosmetic outcomes over a mean 15 months of follow-up.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Caution warranted before adopting modified closure; leaves open efficacy versus standard techniques in device implantation.
Infection is a well-recognized complication that can occur after the implantation of cardiac devices such as pacemakers and implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs). Reported infection rates after new device implantation are reported to be around 1%, while infection rates after device generator replacements are higher with a reported average of up to 4-5% per year. Here we report our experience using a modified plastic surgical technique for cardiac device wound closure designed to both reduce infections and enhance cosmetic outcomes. Patients were recruited from among those individuals undergoing routine cardiac device implantation (either new or replacement) at our institution. A total of 124 patients were included in the study. There were 74 women and 48 men, mean age 58 ± 16 years. There were 74 new pacemaker implants and 27 pacemaker generator replacements. There were 17 new ICD generator implants and 6 ICD generator reimplants. Mean follow-up time was 15 ± 16 months. During the follow-up period, there have been no device infections nor any wound dehiscences observed. Each patient felt that the scar was cosmetically acceptable. Two patients developed mild rashes to the clear plastic adhesive that resolved after removal. The modified wound closure technique described above appears to minimize cardiac device wound infections while facilitating cosmetically acceptable wound scar formation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Grubb et al. (2010) conducted an observational in Cardiac device implantation (n=124). Modified plastic surgical technique for wound closure was evaluated on Device infections and wound dehiscences. A modified plastic surgical technique for cardiac device wound closure resulted in 0 device infections and 0 wound dehiscences over a mean follow-up of 15 months.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: