Key result
CIED infection rates average ~1% but show steady historical growth.
Why the study?
The use of cardiac implantable electronic devices has increased, accompanied by a disproportionate rise in device infection rates, with unclear contributing factors.
The rate of CIED infections is increasing disproportionately to device use, driven by factors such as re-interventions, aging populations, and more complex devices.
CIED infection rates averaging 1% with temporal rise warrant clinical vigilance; leaves open optimal prevention strategies in contemporary practice.
The use of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs), which includes permanent pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators, has greatly increased over the past two decades. Unfortunately, along with the rising use of cardiac medical devices, there has been a disproportional increase in the number of infections of such devices. The rates of infection of CIED range from 0.1% to 4%, with an average rate of 1%. . A recent analysis showed that infection rate grew from 1.61% in 1993 to 2.41% in 2008, possibly due to two factors: aging of population and increased use of more complex devices. The most important risk factors for infection are re-intervention for hematoma evacuation or lead displacement, device replacement increasing with aging of population, and use of dual and triple chamber devices that increased in the last years.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Abhilash et al. (2014) conducted a review in Infections of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices. Cardiac implantable electronic devices was evaluated on Infection rate. Cardiac implantable electronic device infection rates average 1% (ranging from 0.1% to 4%) and grew from 1.61% in 1993 to 2.41% in 2008.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: