Key result
Incidental mobile echodensities on CIED leads were detected in 1.6% of patients and had benign long-term outcomes, whereas MEDs near the tricuspid valve were strongly associated with IE.
Why the study?
Incidental mobile echodensities on cardiac implantable electronic device leads are commonly detected, but their incidence and clinical outcomes are not well defined.
What is the incidence and clinical significance of incidental mobile echodensities on CIED leads detected on routine TTE?
Observational (n=1,849)
What is the incidence and clinical significance of incidental mobile echodensities on CIED leads detected on routine TTE?
Incidental mobile echodensities on CIED leads are rare (1.6%) and can be safely managed conservatively in asymptomatic patients with normal inflammatory markers and negative blood cultures.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Incidental CIED lead echodensities may not require intervention; leaves open prospective validation of location-specific IE risk.
BACKGROUND: Patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) frequently undergo transthoracic echocardiography (TTE). As a result, incidental mobile echodensities (MEDs) attached to device leads are commonly detected. The aim of this study was to estimate the incidence and clinical outcomes of incidental MEDs on CIED leads. METHODS: A retrospective analysis performed between 2011 and 2018 identified 3548 TTE studies performed on 1849 patients with CIEDs. RESULTS: MEDs were identified in 30 patients (1.6%) without clinical suspicion of infective endocarditis (IE). Patients with incidental MEDs were apyrexial, and those tested demonstrated low inflammatory markers and negative blood cultures (BC). In this group, the majority (83%) of MEDs were in the right atrium and no MEDs were detected near the tricuspid valve. Transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) did not influence clinical outcomes. No patient required long-term antibiotics or lead extraction and no IE-related deaths were identified from electronic health records during a mean follow-up period of 43 months (1-89). In contrast, nine patients with suspected IE were all pyrexial with elevated inflammatory markers, had positive BC, and had proven IE. In these cases, the majority of MEDs were at the device lead/tricuspid valve interface. MEDs close to the tricuspid valve were strongly associated with IE (P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of MEDs on CIED leads detected on routine TTE was 1.6%. Conservative management of asymptomatic patients with normal inflammatory markers and BC without TEE, antibiotics, or lead extraction did not reveal any signal for long-term adverse events within the limitations of the study.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Robinson et al. (2020) conducted an observational in Cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) (n=1,849). Incidental mobile echodensities (MEDs) on CIED leads vs. Suspected infective endocarditis was evaluated on Incidence of incidental MEDs on CIED leads. Incidental mobile echodensities on CIED leads were detected in 1.6% of patients and had benign long-term outcomes, whereas MEDs near the tricuspid valve were strongly associated with IE.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: