Key result
This editorial discusses the challenges of treating cardiac implantable electronic device infections and the potential for further reductions in infection rates.
Why the study?
Do enveloped cardiac devices prevent CIED infections compared to standard strategies?
Do enveloped cardiac devices prevent CIED infections compared to standard strategies?
This editorial discusses the potential for novel strategies, such as enveloped devices, to further reduce CIED infection rates beyond standard preoperative antibiotics and sterile techniques.
Infections involving cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) are challenging to treat. Primary infections, mostly pocket infections occurring at the time of implantation, usually require removal of the device, thus adding to the cost and morbidity associated with CIEDs. Secondary infections, resulting from bacteremia from a remote source, often lead to endocarditis with additional devastating outcomes. Despite the effectiveness of current standard strategies for prevention of CIED infections (i.e., sterile surgical techniques and the timely administration of preoperative antibiotics), the potential to achieve further reductions in infection rates exists.1 In this issue of the Journal, Tarakji et al. report the results . . .
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pérez et al. (2019) conducted an editorial in Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infections. This editorial discusses the challenges of treating cardiac implantable electronic device infections and the potential for further reductions in infection rates.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: