PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
March 1, 2017Circulation Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology63 citations

Reimplantation and Repeat Infection After Cardiac-Implantable Electronic Device Infections

View Full Paper
TBThomas A. BoyleDUDaniel Z. UslanJPJordan M. Prutkin

Structured PICO

Does complete device removal and reimplantation reduce repeat infection rates compared to retaining hardware in patients with CIED infections?

P
Population
434 patients with cardiovascular-implantable electronic device (CIED) infections enrolled prospectively between 2009 and 2012
I
Intervention
Complete device removal followed by reimplantation with new devices
C
Comparator
Retained original hardware
O
Outcome
Repeat infection within 6 monthshard clinical

Complete device removal and reimplantation after CIED infection is safe and associated with a low risk of repeat infection (1.8%) compared to retaining hardware (11.3%).

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Infection is a serious complication of cardiovascular-implantable electronic device implantation and necessitates removal of all hardware for optimal treatment. Strategies for reimplanting hardware after infection vary widely and have not previously been analyzed using a large, multicenter study. METHODS AND RESULTS: The MEDIC (Multicenter Electrophysiologic Device Infection Cohort) prospectively enrolled subjects with cardiovascular-implantable electronic device infections at multiple institutions in the United States and abroad between 2009 and 2012. Reimplantation strategies were evaluated overall, and every patient who relapsed within 6 months was individually examined for clinical information that could help explain the negative outcome. Overall, 434 patients with cardiovascular-implantable electronic device infections were prospectively enrolled at participating centers. During the initial course of therapy, complete device removal was done in 381 patients (87.8%), and 220 of them (57.7%) were ultimately reimplanted with new devices. Overall, the median time between removal and reimplantation was 10 days, with an interquartile range of 6 to 19 days. Eleven of the 434 patients had another infection within 6 months, but only 4 of them were managed with cardiovascular-implantable electronic device removal and reimplantation during the initial infection. Thus, the repeat infection rate was low (1.8%) in those who were reimplanted. Patients who retained original hardware had a 11.3% repeat infection rate. CONCLUSIONS: Our study findings confirm that a broad range of reimplant strategies are used in clinical practice. They suggest that it is safe to reimplant cardiac devices after extraction of previously infected hardware and that the risk of a second infection is low, regardless of reimplant timing.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Boyle et al. (2017) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a029a8d98cafe0df57548fdhttps://doi.org/10.1161/circep.116.004822
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Same-day contralateral implantation of a permanent device after lead extraction for isolated pocket infection2013 · 24 citations
  2. 2Transcutaneous lead implantation connected to an externalized pacemaker in patients with implantable cardiac defibrillator/pacemaker infection and pacemaker dependency2013 · 43 citations
  3. 3One Stage Side‐to‐Side Replacement of Infected Pulse Generators and Leads2006 · 35 citations
  4. 4Rising Rates of Cardiac Rhythm Management Device Infections in the United States: 1996 through 20032006 · 380 citations
  5. 5Management and Outcome of Permanent Pacemaker and Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Infections2007 · 749 citations