Key result
Aggressive antibiotic therapy shows no benefit over a mild scheme for preventing CIED infections.
Why the study?
The increasing number of cardiac implantable electronic device implantations has led to more infections, and the comparative effectiveness of mild versus aggressive antibiotic prophylaxis schemes is unclear.
Does an aggressive scheme of postoperative antibiotic therapy reduce cardiac implantable electronic device infection compared to a mild scheme in patients undergoing CIED implantation?
Observational (n=355)
No
Does an aggressive scheme of postoperative antibiotic therapy reduce cardiac implantable electronic device infection compared to a mild scheme in patients undergoing CIED implantation?
Absolute Event Rate: 1.13% vs 3.5%
p-value: p=0.149
An aggressive postoperative antibiotic therapy scheme did not significantly reduce the risk of CIED infection compared to a mild scheme in this single-center retrospective cohort.
Background: The number of cardiac implantable electronic device implantation procedures has increased dramatically in recent decades due to population aging and expansion of indications. At the same time, the number of cardiac implantable electronic device associated complications has increased too. Infection is a very important and heavy complication of cardiac implantable electronic device implantation, which significantly increases mortality and morbidity. This study aimed to estimate the risk of cardiac implantable electronic device infection in a group of patients who received an aggressive scheme of postoperative antibiotic therapy and compare this with the risk of infection in another group, where a mild antibiotic therapy scheme was used. Methods: A retrospective, observational study was performed. The study sample included 355 patients. Two antibiotic prophylaxis and wound follow-up protocols (mild and aggressive) were used. In this study the effectiveness of both methods to prevent a cardiac implantable electronic device related infection was compared. Results: The prevalence of infection was 3.5% in the group with mild scheme and 1.13% in the group with the aggressive scheme. The difference in two subgroups was not significant (p=0,149). According to this study severe renal failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and thyroid dysfunction were found as significant predictors for having cardiac implantable electronic device infection. In participants who underwent a reimplantation and in those with postoperative hematoma the odds of having infection was higher, compared to patients with primary implantation and absence of hematoma. Age of participants with cardiac implantable electronic device infection was younger compared to patients without infection. Conclusion: According to this study there is no statistically significant difference on cardiac implantable electronic device infection between mild and aggressive antibiotic therapy schemes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ghazaryan et al. (2022) conducted an observational in Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation (n=355). Aggressive antibiotic therapy scheme vs. Mild antibiotic therapy scheme was evaluated on CIED-related infection (p=0.149). An aggressive antibiotic therapy scheme did not significantly reduce the prevalence of cardiac implantable electronic device infections compared to a mild scheme (1.13% vs 3.5%, p=0.149).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: