Key result
Lead extraction for infected devices is linked to ~5-fold higher in-hospital mortality versus fractured leads.
Why the study?
Patients undergoing lead extraction for infected devices have worse outcomes compared with those with noninfected devices, but predictors of in-hospital mortality and major adverse events were not fully characterized.
Does lead extraction for infected devices increase in-hospital mortality and major adverse events compared to extraction for noninfected devices?
Observational (n=57,220)
Yes
Does lead extraction for infected devices increase in-hospital mortality and major adverse events compared to extraction for noninfected devices?
Lead extraction for infected devices carries a significantly higher risk of in-hospital mortality and major adverse events compared to extraction for noninfected devices, with Streptococcus infection, anemia, and heart failure predicting worse outcomes.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Infected lead extraction was associated with higher mortality; warrants procedural caution while leaving optimal strategies open in observational data.
Background Patients undergoing lead extraction for infected devices have worse outcomes compared with those with noninfected devices. We assessed predictors of in‐hospital mortality and procedure‐related major adverse events ( MAEs ) in a large cohort undergoing lead extraction. Methods and Results Deidentified hospital records procedure from 7 states between 1994 and 2013 were aggregated and International Classification of Disease, Ninth Revision (ICD‐9) procedure codes were used to identify hospital records reporting lead extraction. MAEs included death, cardiac tamponade, hemothorax, and need for emergent cardiac surgery. Predictors of in‐hospital MAEs for infected compared with noninfected leads were identified using multivariate regression. Associations between outcomes and specific microbe were also assessed. In total, 57 220 discharges specified lead extraction. Infected leads accounted for the minority of total lead extractions compared with fractured leads (16.1 versus 59.8%, 25.7% not reported). There were 3298 MAE s (5.8%) including 980 deaths (1.7%). Multivariate predictors of MAE included black race, atrial fibrillation, anemia, heart failure, and admission via either hospital transfer or emergency department versus home (all P <0.001). Infected leads were associated with an increased risk of death (4.6% versus 0.9%, P <0.001) compared with leads with fracture only. Among patients with microbial data, staphylococcal infection was most common, whereas streptococcal infection was associated with the worst outcomes. Conclusions Patients undergoing extraction of infected leads have higher in‐hospital mortality and adverse events compared with noninfected leads. Streptococcus, anemia, and heart failure are predictors of adverse outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Aleong et al. (2020) conducted an observational in Patients undergoing lead extraction (n=57,220). Infected leads vs. Noninfected leads (fractured leads) was evaluated on In-hospital death (p=<0.001). Lead extraction for infected devices was associated with a significantly higher risk of in-hospital death compared with extraction for fractured leads (4.6% vs 0.9%, P<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: