Why the study?
Reports on the financial cost of treating CIED infection outside the United States were limited.
Does a delayed re-implant strategy reduce length of stay and costs compared to an early re-implant strategy in patients with CIED infections?
Does a delayed re-implant strategy reduce length of stay and costs compared to an early re-implant strategy in patients with CIED infections?
A delayed re-implant strategy for CIED infections significantly reduces hospital length of stay without increasing total healthcare costs compared to an early re-implant strategy.
CIED infection costs similar with early or delayed re-implantation in UK data; leaves open optimal pathway for prospective trials.
BACKGROUND: There are limited reports outlining the financial cost of treating cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infection outside the United States. This study aimed to determine the average treatment cost of CIED infection in a large UK tertiary referral centre and compared costs of different treatment pathways that are recognised in the management of CIED infection (early versus delayed re-implantation). METHODS: We retrospectively analysed cost and length of stay (LOS) data for consecutive patients undergoing infected CIED extraction with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT-D [with defibrillator], CRT-P [with pacemaker]), implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) and permanent pacemakers (PPMs). RESULTS: Between January 2013 and March 2015, complete data was available for 84 patients (18 [21.4%] CRT-D, 24 [28.6%] ICDs and 42 [50.0%] PPMs). When all cases were considered the cost of infection ranged from £5,139 (PPM) to £24,318 (CRT-D). Considering different treatment strategies; 41 (48.8%) underwent CIED extraction and re-implantation during the same admission (early re-implant strategy (ER). 43 (51.2%) underwent extraction, but were then discharged home to be re-admitted for day-case re-implantation (delayed re-implant strategy (DR)). Median LOS was significantly shorter in DR compared to ER (5.0 vs. 18.0 days, p<0.001). The total cost of CIED infection episode was similar for both treatment strategies (median £14,241.48 vs. £14,741.70 including wearable defibrillator (Lifevest) and outpatient antibiotics costs, ER vs. DR; p = 0.491). CONCLUSION: CIED infections are expensive and associated with significant health-economic burden. When all device types were considered, a DR strategy is associated with reduced LOS without an increased cost penalty.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ahmed et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: