Implantable electrophysiologic cardiac device infections: a risk factor analysis

Aging and cardiac implantable electronic device complications: is the procedure safe in older patients?

BACKGROUND

In this study, we investigated whether there is a higher incidence of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) procedures related complications in older (≥ 75 years) than in younger (< 75 years) patients.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study enrolled patients who had undergone CIED procedures (de novo implantation, system upgrade, generator substitution, pocket revision or lead replacement) at two heart centers in Turkey between January 2011 and May 2023. The primary composite endpoint included clinically significant hematoma (CSH), pericardial effusion or tamponade, pneumothorax, and infection related to the device system. Secondary outcomes included each component of the composite end point.

RESULTS

The overall sample included 1923 patients (1419 < 75 years and 504 aged ≥ 75 years). There was no difference between the groups in terms of cumulative events defined as primary outcome (3.5% vs. 4.4%, p = 0.393). Infection related to device system was significantly higher in the ≥ 75 age group (1.8% vs. 3.4%, p = 0.034). There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of clinically significant hematoma and pneumothorax (0.7% vs. 0.4%, p = 0.451, 1.4% vs. 1.0%, p = 0.477, respectively). In multivariate model analysis, no association was found between age ≥ 75 years and infection related to the device system.

CONCLUSION

Infection rates were relatively higher in the patient group aged ≥ 75 years. This patient group should be evaluated more carefully in terms of infection development before and after the procedure.

Risk Scores for Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Infection: Which One to Believe In?

Infections are important complications of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED), with a high prognostic impact. Several risk factors for CIED infections are known. Different studies have been published proposing different risk scores, in order to preoperatively assess the individual likelihood of developing a CIED infection. Among the different scores, large heterogeneity exists and there is no consensus or convergence on a single score finding large applicability in global practice. The aim of this review is to comprehensively present and analyze all the available risk scores for CIED infection, with particular regard to the evidence of comparison studies.

Risk factors for hematoma in patients undergoing cardiac device procedures: A WRAP-IT trial analysis

Background

Implant site hematoma is a known complication of cardiac device procedures and can lead to major consequences.

Objectives

To evaluate risk factors for hematoma and further understand the relationship between anticoagulant (AC), antiplatelet (AP) use, and hematoma development.

Methods

We included 6800 patients from the WRAP-IT trial. To assess baseline and procedural characteristics associated with hematoma within the first 30 days postprocedure, a stepwise Cox regression model was implemented with minimal Akaike information criterion. Cox regressions were also used to evaluate AC/AP use and hematoma risk.

Results

The overall rate of hematoma was 2.2%. The model identified 11 baseline and procedural characteristics associated with hematoma risk. AC use (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.44, P < .001), lower body mass index (HR: 1.06, P < .001), and history of valve surgery (HR: 2.11, P < .001) were associated with the highest risk. AP use, male sex, history of coronary artery disease, existing pocket, history of nonischemic cardiomyopathy, number of previous cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) procedures, procedure time, and lead revision were associated with moderate risk. Antithrombotic use was high overall (86%) and AC+AP use was highly predictive of hematoma risk. Regardless of AC status, AP use was associated with an almost doubling of risk vs no AP (HR = 1.85, P = .0006) in the general cohort. Interruption of AC was associated with the lowest hematoma risk (HR = 2.35) while heparin bridging (HR = 4.98) and AP use vs no AP use (HR = 1.85) was associated with the highest hematoma risk.

Conclusion

The results of this analysis highlight risk factors associated with the development of hematoma in patients undergoing CIED procedures and can inform antithrombotic management.

OUTCOMES OF LEADLESS PACEMAKER IMPLANTATION IN PATIENTS WITH MECHANICAL HEART VALVES

INTRODUCTION

Device infections constitute a major complication of transvenous pacemakers. Mechanical heart valves (MHV) increase the risk of infective endocarditis (IE) and pacemaker infection, requiring lifelong vitamin K-antagonists (VKA), which may affect patient management. Leadless pacemakers (LP) are associated with low infection rates, posing an attractive option in MHV patients requiring permanent pacing.This study describes outcomes following LP implantation in patients with MHV.

METHODS

This is a multicenter, observational, retrospective study including consecutive patients implanted with an LP at 5 centers between June 2015 and January 2020.Procedural outcomes, antithrombotic management, complications, performance during follow-up and episodes of bacteremia and IE were compared between patients with and without an MHV (MHV and non-MHV groups).

RESULTS

Four hundred fifty-nine patients were included (74 in the MHV group, 16.1%, and 385 in the non-MHV group, 83.9%).Procedural outcomes and acute electrical performance were comparable between groups.Vascular complications and cardiac perforation occurred in 2.7 vs. 2.3% (p=1) and 0% vs. 0.8% (p=1) in the MHV group and non-MHV group.One case of IE occurred in the MHV group and 2 in the non-MHV group.In MHV patients, uninterrupted VKA was used in 83.8 %, whereas 16.2 % were heparin-bridged.Vascular complication or tamponade occurred in 1(8.3 %) MHV heparin-bridged patient vs. 1 (1.6 %) MHV uninterrupted VKA patient (p=0.3).

CONCLUSION

LP implantation outcomes in MHV patients are comparable to the general LP population.Device-related infections are rare following LP implantation, including in patients with MHV.In the MHV group, periprocedural anticoagulation management was not associated with significantly different rates of tamponade or vascular complication. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Epidemiology of cardiac implantable electronic device infections: incidence and risk factors

Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infection is a potentially devastating complication of CIED procedures, causing significant morbidity and mortality for patients. Of all CIED complications, infection has the greatest impact on mortality, requirement for re-intervention and additional hospital treatment days. Based on large prospective studies, the infection rate at 12-months after a CIED procedure is approximately 1%. The risk of CIED infection may be related to several factors which should be considered with regards to risk minimization. These include technical factors, patient factors, and periprocedural factors. Technical factors include the number of leads and size of generator, the absolute number of interventions which have been performed for the patient, and the operative approach. Patient factors include various non-modifiable underlying comorbidities and potentially modifiable transient conditions. Procedural factors include both peri-operative and post-operative factors. The contemporary PADIT score, derived from a large cohort of CIED patients, is useful for the prediction of infection risk. In this review, we summarize the key information regarding epidemiology, incidence and risk factors for CIED infection.

Infectious consequences of hematoma from cardiac implantable electronic device procedures and the role of the antibiotic envelope: A WRAP-IT trial analysis

BACKGROUND

Hematoma is a complication of cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) procedures and may lead to device infection. The TYRX antibacterial envelope reduced major CIED infection by 40% in the randomized WRAP-IT (World-wide Randomized Antibiotic Envelope Infection Prevention Trial) study, but its effectiveness in the presence of hematoma is not well understood.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the incidence and infectious consequences of hematoma and the association between envelope use, hematomas, and major CIED infection among WRAP-IT patients.

METHODS

All 6800 study patients were included in this analysis (control 3429; envelope 3371). Hematomas occurring within 30 days postprocedure (acute) were characterized and grouped by study treatment and evaluated for subsequent infection risk. Data were analyzed using Cox proportional hazard regression modeling.

RESULTS

Acute hematoma incidence was 2.2% at 30 days, with no significant difference between treatment groups (envelope vs control hazard ratio [HR] 1.15; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84-1.58; P = .39). Through all follow-up, the risk of major infection was significantly higher among control patients with hematoma vs those without (13.1% vs 1.6%; HR 11.3; 95% CI 5.5-23.2; P <.001). The risk of major infection was significantly lower in the envelope vs control patients with hematoma (2.5% vs 13.1%; HR 0.18; 95% CI 0.04-0.85; P = .03).

CONCLUSION

The risk of hematoma was 2.2% among WRAP-IT patients. Among control patients, hematoma carried a >11-fold risk of developing a major CIED infection. This risk was significantly mitigated with antibacterial envelope use, with an 82% reduction in major CIED infection among envelope patients who developed hematoma compared to control.

Postimplantation pocket hematoma increases risk of cardiac implantable electronic device infection: A meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

 Several studies have shown an inconsistent relationship between postimplantation pocket hematoma and cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infection. In this study, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the effect of postimplantation hematoma and the risk of CIED infection.

METHODS

 We searched the databases of MEDLINE and EMBASE from inception to March 2020. Included studies were cohort studies, case-control studies, cross-sectional studies, and randomized controlled trials that reported incidence of postimplantation pocket hematoma and CIED infection during the follow-up period. CIED infection was defined as either a device-related local or systemic infection. Data from each study were combined using the random effects, generic inverse variance method of Der Simonian and Laird to calculate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

Fourteen studies were included in final analysis, involving a total of 28 319 participants. In random-effect model, we found that postimplantation pocket hematoma significantly increases the risk of overall CIED infection (OR = 6.30, 95% CI: 3.87-10.24, I 2 = 49.3%). There was no publication bias observed in the funnel plot as well as no small-study effect observed in Egger's test.

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis demonstrated that postimplantation pocket hematoma significantly increases the risk of CIED infection. Precaution should be taken during device implantation to reduce postimplantation hematoma and subsequent CIED infection.

Current strategies to minimize postoperative hematoma formation in patients undergoing cardiac implantable electronic device implantation: A review

There are an increasing number of cardiac electronic device implants and generator changes with a longer patient life expectancy along with concomitant increase in antiplatelet and anticoagulant regimens, which can increase the incidence of pocket hematomas. We have conducted an in-depth analysis on the relevant literature, which is rife with varying definition of hematomas, on ways to reduce pocket hematomas. We have analyzed studies on periprocedural medication management, intraprocedural use of prohemostatic agents, and postprocedure role of compression devices.

Preventive infection control in cardiac device implantation

BACKGROUND

Cardiac implantable electronic devices have been increasingly used in recent years; as a result, there has been a rise in device-related complications. Pacemaker-associated infection is challenging to manage, including system removal, antimicrobial therapy and reimplantation at another site. The aim of this study was to evaluate adherence to the steps in an infection control protocol in cardiac device implantation.

RESULTS

A total of 100 patients referred for cardiac device implantation were enrolled in the study. They were evaluated with regard to the application of infection control measures during device implantation and followed-up for 6 months to detect clinical signs of device-related infection (DRI). A significant correlation was found between the development of postoperative DRI and the presence or absence of the following factors: increasing patient age (p = 0.010), diabetes mellitus (p = 0.024), number of operators ≥4 (p = 0.001), implantation of a biventricular system (p = 0.025), duration of sterilization (p = 0.001), wearing double gloves (p < 0.001) and postoperative hematoma (p = 0.021).

CONCLUSIONS

The study identified the following risk factors for DRI: age, diabetes mellitus and cardiac resynchronization therapy system implantation (p = 0.025). Antiseptic measures such as double-glove technique and duration of skin disinfection prior to the procedure, as well as environmental factors, also influenced device infection, as did the number of operators/staff and pocket hematoma.

Clinical predictors of pocket hematoma after cardiac device implantation and replacement

AIMS

Pocket hematoma is a common complication of cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) procedures. the aim of the study was to research the clinical factors associated with pocket hematoma formation after CIED implantation or replacement and to identify the best perioperative antithrombotic management.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 500 consecutive patients who underwent to CIED implantation or replacement at our center from November 2014.

RESULTS

Among our population, 206 patients (41.2%) were on anticoagulant therapy at the time of the intervention: 68 (13.6%) on ongoing Warfarin; 111 (22.2%) on low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH); and 27 (5.4%) on ongoing direct oral anticoagulants. Antiplatelet therapy was present in 262 (52.4%) patients: in particular, 50 (10%) were on dual antiplatelet therapy, 64 (12.8%) were on single antiplatelet therapy and anticoagulant therapy, whereas 12 (2.4%) were on anticoagulant with dual antiplatelet therapy.Incidence of pocket hematoma after CIEDs implantation was of 4.6%. Considering the different perioperative anticoagulant strategies, patients on LMWH presented the higher hematoma rate [11/100 patients (11.0%), P < 0.001]. At the multivariate analysis, anticoagulant with dual antiplatelet therapy (P = 0.021, OR 6.3, IC 1.3-30.8), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) less than 30% (P < 0.001, OR 7.4, IC 2.7-20.4), and use of LMWH (P = 0.008, OR 3.8, IC 1.4-10.6) resulted the strongest predictors of pocket hematoma (Hosmer test = 0.899).Considering replacement procedures, incidence of pocket hematoma was of 4.4%. The incidence was higher after ICD/CRT-D replacement. The majority of pocket hematoma occurred in patients with mechanical valve prosthesis (3/4 cases, 75%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The use of LMWH and a low LVEF expose patients to a higher risk of pocket hematoma after CIED procedures. Anticoagulant with dual antiplatelet therapy and LMWH should be avoided.

Effect of Direct Oral Anticoagulants, Warfarin, and Antiplatelet Agents on Risk of Device Pocket Hematoma: Combined Analysis of BRUISE CONTROL 1 and 2

BACKGROUND

Oral anticoagulant use is common among patients undergoing pacemaker or defibrillator surgery. BRUISE CONTROL (Bridge or Continue Coumadin for Device Surgery Randomized Controlled Trial; NCT00800137) demonstrated that perioperative warfarin continuation reduced clinically significant hematomas (CSH) by 80% compared with heparin bridging (3.5% versus 16%). BRUISE-CONTROL-2 (NCT01675076) observed a similarly low risk of CSH when comparing continued versus interrupted direct oral anticoagulant (2.1% in both groups). Using patient level data from both trials, the current study aims to: (1) evaluate the effect of concomitant antiplatelet therapy on CSH, and (2) understand the relative risk of CSH in patients treated with direct oral anticoagulant versus continued warfarin.

METHODS

We analyzed 1343 patients included in BRUISE-CONTROL-1 and BRUISE-CONTROL-2. The primary outcome for both trials was CSH. There were 408 patients identified as having continued either a single or dual antiplatelet agent at the time of device surgery.

RESULTS

Antiplatelet use (versus nonuse) was associated with CSH in 9.8% versus 4.3% of patients (P<0.001), and remained a strong independent predictor after multivariable adjustment (odds ratio, 1.965; 95% CI, 1.202-3.213; P=0.0071). In multivariable analysis, adjusting for antiplatelet use, there was no significant difference in CSH observed between direct oral anticoagulant use compared with continued warfarin (odds ratio, 0.858; 95% CI, 0.375-1.963; P=0.717).

CONCLUSIONS

Concomitant antiplatelet therapy doubled the risk of CSH during device surgery. No difference in CSH was found between direct oral anticoagulant versus continued warfarin. In anticoagulated patients undergoing elective or semi-urgent device surgery, the patient specific benefit/risk of holding an antiplatelet should be carefully considered.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifiers: NCT00800137, NCT01675076.

Device infections in implantable cardioverter defibrillators versus permanent pacemakers: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Recent studies suggest that implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) are associated with increased risk of cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infections when compared with permanent pacemakers (PPMs). However, there were controversies among studies. In this study we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the risk of device infection in ICD versus PPM.

METHODS

We searched the databases of MEDLINE and EMBASE from inception to January 2019. Data from each study were combined using the random-effects, generic inverse variance method of Der Simonian and Laird to calculate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

Twenty-seven studies involving 202 323 CIEDs (36 782 ICDs and 165 541 PPMs) were included. Infections occurred from 9 days to 6 years postoperatively. When compared with PPM, ICD had a significantly higher risk of device infection in overall analysis (OR = 1.62, 95% CI: 1.29-2.04). The risk was seen in subgroups such as single chamber or dual chamber device (OR = 1.57, 95% CI: 1.18-2.09), de novo implantation (OR = 1.62, 95% CI: 1.29-2.69), revision implantation (OR = 1.63, 95% CI: 1.24-2.13), and cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) (OR = 1.75, 95% CI: 1.18-2.60). CRT-defibrillator increased risk of infection over CRT-pacemaker in revision implantation (OR = 1.81, 95% CI: 1.20-2.74) but not in de novo implantation (OR = 1.07, 95% CI: 0.23-4.88). The increased risk of infection among defibrillator was higher in CRT compared to non-CRT but not significant (P = 0.654).

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis demonstrates a statistically significant increased risk of device infection in CIED patients who received ICD when compared to PPM.

Use of MPH hemostatic powder for electrophysiology device implantation reduces postoperative rates of pocket hematoma and infection

BACKGROUND

Surgical site bleeding and infection are potential complications after electrophysiology (EP) device implantation procedures. To date, there is a wide variety of tools for management of intraoperative bleeding but it still remains unclear what methods are preferred.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of our study is to compare the rate of complications in patients who underwent cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation utilizing MPH hemostatic powder to the rate of complications in those patients who underwent standard procedure protocol without MPH hemostatic powder.

METHODS

In our study, a new plant-derived microporous polysaccharide hemostatic powder (Arista) was used. A total of 283 consecutive patients were retrospectively studied to assess the rate of complications in patients who underwent CIED implantation with MPH hemostatic powder (n = 77, MPH hemostatic powder) and without (n = 206, no MPH hemostatic powder). Patients were followed for 12 months.

RESULTS

The MPH hemostatic powder group of patients had a lower complication rate when compared to no MPH hemostatic powder, 0.3% vs. 1.7% (p < .05), respectively. The rate of device implantation site MPH hematoma in the MPH hemostatic powder group was 0.4%, versus 0.9% in the other group. There were no postoperative infections in the MPH hemostatic powder group versus 3.2% infections in the other group. The main predictor of increased risk of post-procedural complication was the usage of anticoagulation with a hazard ration of 2.7.

CONCLUSION

Using MPH hemostatic powder for post-procedural hemostasis was shown to result in a significant reduction in the rate of overall post-procedural complications (a composite endpoint of hematoma and infections), and a trend in reduction of the infections rates and device implantation site hematoma rates.

Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Device Infections

Infections associated with cardiac implantable electronic devices are increasing and are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. This article reviews the epidemiology, microbiology, and risk factors for acquisition of these infections. The complex diagnostic and management strategies associated with these serious infections are reviewed with an emphasis on recent updates and advances, as well as existing controversies. Additionally, the latest in preventative strategies are reviewed.

Wound haematoma following defibrillator implantation: incidence and predictors in the Shockless Implant Evaluation (SIMPLE) trial

Aims

Pocket haematoma is a common complication after defibrillator [implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD)] implantation, which is not only painful, but also increases the risk of device-related infection, and possibly embolic events. The present study seeks to evaluate the rate and predictors of clinically significant pocket haematoma.

Methods and results

This study included 2500 patients receiving an ICD in the SIMPLE trial. A clinically significant pocket haematoma was defined as a haematoma that required re-operation or interruption of oral anticoagulation (OAC) therapy. Clinically significant pocket haematoma occurred in 56 of 2500 patients (2.2%) of which 6 (10.7%) developed device-related infection. Patients who developed pocket haematoma were older (mean age 67.6 ± 8.8 years vs. 62.7 ± 11.6 years, P < 0.001), were more likely to have permanent atrial fibrillation (30.4 vs. 6.7%, P < 0.001) and a history of stroke (17.9 vs. 6.7%, P = 0.004), or were more likely to receive peri-operative OAC (50.0 vs. 28.4%, P < 0.001), unfractionated heparin (16.1 vs. 5.2%, P = 0.003), or low-molecular-weight heparin (37.5 vs. 17.5%, P < 0.001). Independent predictors of wound haematoma on multivariable analysis included the use of heparin bridging (OR 2.65, 95% CI 1.48-4.73, P = 0.001), sub-pectoral location of ICD (OR 2.00, 95% CI 1.12-3.57, P =0.020), previous stroke (OR 2.47, 95% CI 1.20-5.10, P = 0.015), an upgrade from permanent pacemaker (OR 2.52, 95% CI 1.07-5.94, P = 0.035), and older age (OR 1.03, 95% CI 1.00-1.06, P = 0.049).

Conclusion

Pocket haematoma remains an important complication of ICD implantation and is associated with a high risk of infection. Independent predictors of pocket haematoma include heparin bridging, prior stroke, sub-pectoral placement of ICD, older age, and upgrade from a pacemaker.

Utilization and in-hospital complications of cardiac resynchronization therapy: trends in the United States from 2003 to 2013

Aims

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) device implantation has been shown to reduce morbidity and mortality in selected patients with heart failure. We sought to investigate the utilization and in-hospital complications of cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator (CRT-D) and pacemaker (CRT-P) implantations in the United States from 2003 to 2013.

Methods and results

Patients receiving CRT-D or CRT-P were identified in the National Inpatient Sample database (NIS), using the International Classification of Diseases-Ninth Revision-Clinical Modification procedure codes. Annual implantation rates, patient demographics, co-morbidities, in-hospital complications, and length of stay were analysed. From 2003 to 2013, an estimated total of 439 010 (95% CI: 406 723-471 296) inpatient CRT implantations were performed in the U.S. The median age of patients was 72 and 71% were male. Overall, 6.1% had at least one complication. During the study period, comorbidity index and overall complication rate increased (P = 0.002 and P = 0.01, respectively). Mortality and length of stay showed no significant trend. Predictors of complications included: age 65 and older, female sex (OR: 1.19; 95% CI: 1.12-1.27), Deyo-Charlson Comorbidity Index, and elective admission (OR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.57-0.66).

Conclusion

From 2003 to 2013, the severity of comorbid conditions increased and a rising trend was observed in the rate of periprocedural complications among patients undergoing CRT in the United States. In-hospital mortality and length of stay showed no uniform trend.

Management of Perioperative Anticoagulation for Device Implantation

Periprocedural management of anticoagulation for cardiac device implantation has evolved over the past 20 years. The traditional paradigm of vitamin K antagonist interruption with heparin bridging has now been shown to be less safe than continuation of vitamin K antagonists at therapeutic levels. Dual antiplatelet therapy during device implantation poses substantial risk but is often necessary. The safest dosing strategy for newer direct oral anticoagulants is still not clear.

Post procedural complications of cardiac implants done in a resource limited setting under 'C' arm: A single centre experience

Background

Cardiology interventions in peripheral hospitals is a challenging task where cardiologist have to fight against time and limited resources. Most of the sudden cardiac deaths occur due to arrhythmia and heart blocks/sinus node dysfunction. Our study is a single peripheral center experience of cardiac devices implantation using a 'C' Arm. The aim of this study was to post procedural complications of cardiac implants done in aresource limited setting under 'C' arm.

Methods

This study is done at a peripheral cardiology center with no cardiac catheterization laboratory (CCL) facilities. Consecutive patients reporting to cardiology center, between Jan 2015 and Oct 2016, with a definite indication for cardiac device implant were included in the study. All the procedure of implantation was done in the operation theatre under 'C' arm under local anesthesia with continuous cardiac monitoring and critical care back up.

Results

Total 58 device implantations were done from Jan 2015 to Oct 2016. The mean age of the patients was 67.15 ± 10.85 years. Males constituted almost two third (68.9%) of patients. The commonest indication for device implantation was sinus node dysfunction in 60.34% followed by complete heart block in 25.86% and ventricular tachycardia in 12.06%. No post procedure infection was observed in our study.

Conclusion

Device implantation constitute a major group of life saving interventions in cardiology practice. Our study has emphasised that when appropriate aseptic measures are taken during device implantation at peripheral centres, the complications rate are comparable to interventions done at advance cardiac centres.

International survey of knowledge, attitudes, and practices of cardiologists regarding prevention and management of cardiac implantable electronic device infections

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) can be life-saving. However, complications from CIED infection can be life-threatening, often requiring device removal. Despite publication of CIED infection management guidelines, there remains marked variation in clinical practice.

OBJECTIVE

To better understand and quantify these differences, we conducted a multinational survey of practitioners of CIED management.

METHODS

An electronic survey was sent to Heart Rhythm Society members, spanning 70 countries across six continents. All responses were collected anonymously.

RESULTS

227 out of 3,600 (6.3%) responded to the survey. The majority of surveys were completed by practitioners from the United States (168; 68.3%) and 53.8% of these practiced in academic medical centers. The large majority (92.7%) of sites had protocols to ensure appropriate timing of prophylactic antibiotics. Superficial (incisional) site infections were treated with antibiotics alone 52.5% of the time (consistent with guidelines); in contrast, deep pocket infections were treated with antibiotics (with device removal) in accordance to guidelines only 37.4% of the time. Almost all providers (98.7%) were inclined to perform complete hardware removal in cases of CIED-related endocarditis. In contrast, 82.2% of survey participants suggested complete CIED system removal in patients with an occult Gram-positive bacteremia, 65.5% with occult Gram-negative bacteremia, and 59.3% with prolonged bacteremia due to a source other than CIED.

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest wide variability in clinical practice in managing CIED infection with significant deviations from published guidelines. There is critical need to increase awareness and develop institutional protocols to ensure adherence with evidence-based guidelines to optimize outcomes.

Cardiac implantable electronic device infections: Who is at greatest risk?

BACKGROUND

Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infections are associated with hospitalization, mortality, increased costs, and adverse outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

Determine the burden of infections for CIEDs based on device type, associated comorbidities, and clinical characteristics over a 12-year period.

METHODS

Utilizing data from the National Inpatient Sample database for cases from 2000 through 2012, we identified procedures for device-related infection (DRI) using International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) codes for CIED removal with diagnosis codes for device-related infection or systemic infection. Cases were categorized into 4 groups: single-chamber pacemaker, dual-chamber pacemaker, cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) device, and intracardiac defibrillator (ICD).

RESULTS

Of 4,144,683 device-related procedures, 85,203 (2.06%) were associated with DRI. From 2000 through 2012, procedures related to DRI increased from 1.45% to 3.41% (P < .001). The risk of infection for CRT devices was the highest, peaking in 2012 (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 2.43, P < .001). During second half of the study, comorbidities associated with DRI were diabetes (OR: 1.11, P < .001), end-stage renal disease (OR: 3.23, P < .001), hematoma (OR: 2.44, P < .001), malnutrition (OR: 2.66, P < .001), venous thromboembolism (OR: 2.37, P < .001), chronic kidney disease (OR: 1.26, P < .001), and organ transplantation (OR: 2.37, P < .001). Charges associated with CRT DRIs increased nearly 2-fold in a decade. Higher inpatient mortality related to device infection were stroke (OR: 3.19, P < .001), end-stage renal disease (OR: 2.91, P < .001), malnutrition (OR: 2.67, P < .001), cirrhosis (OR: 2.05, P = .001), and organ transplantation (OR: 2.16, P < .001).

CONCLUSION

CIED infections are increasing for all device types and particularly for CRT devices. Precise reasons for rising DRI procedures remain unclear, although conditions leading to immune compromise appear significant.

Incidence of Bleeding-Related Complications During Primary Implantation and Replacement of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices

BACKGROUND

Use of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) is increasing. The incidence of bleeding-related complications during CIED procedures and the association with subsequent infection risk have been studied in trial settings but not in nonrandomized "real-world" populations.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This retrospective database analysis of US insurance claims from the Truven MarketScan database (2009-2013) evaluated the incidence of bleeding complications during, or in the 30 days following, a CIED procedure and the association between bleeding and subsequent infection in days 31 to 365 of follow-up. This study identified 42 606 patients who had a primary or replacement CIED procedure and met all inclusion criteria. Incidence of bleeding ranged from 0.58% to 2.81% by type of pharmaceutical therapy. Incidence of infection during days 31 to 365 of follow-up was significantly higher among patients with a bleeding complication in the first 30 days versus those without (6.56% vs 1.24%, P<0.001), with results upheld in multivariate analysis (HR=2.97, 95% CI 1.94-4.54, P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides a lower bound of the real-world incidence of bleeding complications following a CIED procedure within the coding limitations of an insurance claims database. Results confirm the association between bleeding in the pocket and risk of subsequent infection. Further research is needed to precisely identify the costs associated with bleeding in the pocket.

Clinically Significant Pocket Hematoma Increases Long-Term Risk of Device Infection: BRUISE CONTROL INFECTION Study

BACKGROUND

The BRUISE CONTROL trial (Bridge or Continue Coumadin for Device Surgery Randomized Controlled Trial) demonstrated that a strategy of continued warfarin during cardiac implantable electronic device surgery was safe and reduced the incidence of clinically significant pocket hematoma (CSH). CSH was defined as a post-procedure hematoma requiring further surgery and/or resulting in prolongation of hospitalization of at least 24 h, and/or requiring interruption of anticoagulation. Previous studies have inconsistently associated hematoma with the subsequent development of device infection; reasons include the retrospective nature of many studies, lack of endpoint adjudication, and differing subjective definitions of hematoma.

OBJECTIVES

The BRUISE CONTROL INFECTION (Bridge or Continue Coumadin for Device Surgery Randomized Controlled Trial Extended Follow-Up for Infection) prospectively examined the association between CSH and subsequent device infection.

METHODS

The study included 659 patients with a primary outcome of device-related infection requiring hospitalization, defined as 1 or more of the following: pocket infection; endocarditis; and bloodstream infection. Outcomes were verified by a blinded adjudication committee. Multivariable analysis was performed to identify predictors of infection.

RESULTS

The overall 1-year device-related infection rate was 2.4% (16 of 659). Infection occurred in 11% of patients (7 of 66) with previous CSH and in 1.5% (9 of 593) without CSH. CSH was the only independent predictor and was associated with a >7-fold increased risk of infection (hazard ratio: 7.7; 95% confidence interval: 2.9 to 20.5; p < 0.0001). Empiric antibiotics upon development of hematoma did not reduce long-term infection risk.

CONCLUSIONS

CSH is associated with a significantly increased risk of infection requiring hospitalization within 1 year following cardiac implantable electronic device surgery. Strategies aimed at reducing hematomas may decrease the long-term risk of infection. (Bridge or Continue Coumadin for Device Surgery Randomized Controlled Trial [BRUISE CONTROL]; NCT00800137).

Association of Uninterrupted Oral Anticoagulation During Cardiac Device Implantation with Pocket Hematoma

PURPOSE

Implantation of permanent pacemakers (PPMs) or implantable cardiac defibrillators (ICDs) may be complicated by the development of pocket hematomas. Current practice guidelines provide little guidance to clinicians about the preferred strategy for chronic oral anticoagulation (OAC). The purpose of this study was to examine the frequency and clinical significance of pocket hematoma among patients receiving uninterrupted OAC during cardiac device implantation.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of adult patients undergoing cardiac device implantation between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2012, at an academic teaching hospital. Medical records were reviewed for demographics, comorbidities, and medications. The primary outcome was development of pocket hematomas within 30 days of device implantation. Clinical significance was based on the need for additional intervention. Data were assessed using descriptive statistics, logistic regression, and chi-square tests.

RESULTS

The final cohort included 380 patients. The median age was 68.4 years, and 56.6% were male. Cardiovascular comorbidities were common. Among 80 patients receiving uninterrupted OAC, 71.3% were taking warfarin, 11.2% rivaroxaban, and 17.5% dabigatran. The incidence of pocket hematomas for the entire cohort was 9.7%, of which 1.3% were clinically significant. Pocket hematoma occurred in 21.4% of patients continued on OAC versus 7.7% of those not anticoagulated (P = .001). Pocket hematoma was more common among those receiving ICDs than PPMs (18.5% vs 5.7%, respectively; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Continuing chronic OAC increased pocket hematoma formation but most were clinically insignificant. Pocket hematoma occurred irrespective of the oral anticoagulant drug used, but additional study is needed to determine comparative risks among the drugs.

Impact of Chronic Kidney Disease on Short-Term Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Related Infection: A Nationwide Population-Based Cohort Study

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) increased the incident cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infection, but risk factors of CIED infection in CKD patients remain unclear.Patients who received new CIED implantation between January 1, 1997 and December 31, 2011 were selected from the Taiwan National Health Insurance Database and were divided into 3 groups: patients with normal renal function, CKD patients without dialysis, and CKD patient with dialysis. Two outcomes, CIED infection during index hospitalization and within 1 year after discharge, were evaluated.This study included 38,354 patients, 35,060 patients in normal renal function group, 1927 patients in CKD without dialysis group, and 1367 patients in CKD with dialysis group. CKD patients without dialysis (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.14, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.32-3.46) and CKD patients with dialysis (aOR, 3.78, 95% CI, 2.37-6.02) increased incident CIED infection during index hospitalization compared to patients with normal renal function. Use of steroid (aOR: 2.74, 95% CI, 1.08-6.98) increased the risk of CIED infection in CKD patients without dialysis while chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (aOR: 2.76, 95% CI, 1.06-7.16) increased the risk of CIED infection in CKD patient with dialysis during index hospitalization.CKD is a risk of CIED infection during index hospitalization. Use of steroid and COPD are important risks factors for CIED infection in CKD patients.

Pocket Hematoma: A Call for Definition

Pocket hematoma is a common complication of cardiac implantable electronic device procedures and a potential risk factor for device infections, especially in patients on oral anticoagulation or antiplatelet treatment. There is a wide variability in the incidence of pocket hematoma and bleeding complications in the literature and the major cause for this seems to be the variability of the used definitions for hematomas. The lack of generally accepted definition for pocket hematoma renders the comparisons across the studies difficult. In this article, we briefly review the current literature on this issue and propose a uniform definition for pocket hematoma and criteria for grading the severity of hematoma in clinical practice and research.

Risk factors influencing complications of cardiac implantable electronic device implantation: infection, pneumothorax and heart perforation: a nationwide population-based cohort study

As the number of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) is increasing annually, CIED-related complications are becoming increasingly important. The aim of the study was to assess the risks associated with CIEDs by a nationwide database. Patients were selected from the Taiwan National Health Insurance Database. Admissions for CIED implantation, replacement, and revision were evaluated and the evaluation period was 14 years. Endpoints included CIED-related infection, pneumothorax, and heart perforation. The study included 40,608 patients with a mean age of 71.8 ± 13.3 years. Regarding infection, the incidence rate was 2.45 per 1000 CIED-years. Male gender, younger age, device replacement, and previous infection were risks for infection while old age and high-volume centers (>200 per year) were protectors. The incidence of pneumothorax was 0.6%, with an increased risk in individuals who had chronic obstructive lung disease (COPD) and cardiac resynchronized therapy (CRT). The incidence of heart perforation was 0.09%, with an increased risk in individuals who had pre-operation temporal pacing and steroid use. High-volume center was found to decrease infection rate while male gender, young people, and individuals who underwent replacements were associated with an increased risk of infection. Additionally, pre-operation temporal pacing and steroid use should be avoided if possible. Furthermore, COPD patients or those who accept CRTs should be monitored closely.

A comprehensive multiscale framework for simulating optogenetics in the heart

Optogenetics has emerged as an alternative method for electrical control of the heart, where illumination is used to elicit a bioelectric response in tissue modified to express photosensitive proteins (opsins). This technology promises to enable evocation of spatiotemporally precise responses in targeted cells or tissues, thus creating new possibilities for safe and effective therapeutic approaches to ameliorate cardiac function. Here, we present a comprehensive framework for multi-scale modelling of cardiac optogenetics, allowing both mechanistic examination of optical control and exploration of potential therapeutic applications. The framework incorporates accurate representations of opsin channel kinetics and delivery modes, spatial distribution of photosensitive cells, and tissue illumination constraints, making possible the prediction of emergent behaviour resulting from interactions at sub-organ scales. We apply this framework to explore how optogenetic delivery characteristics determine energy requirements for optical stimulation and to identify cardiac structures that are potential pacemaking targets with low optical excitation threshold.

Pacemaker or defibrillator surgery without interruption of anticoagulation

BACKGROUND

Many patients requiring pacemaker or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) surgery are taking warfarin. For patients at high risk for thromboembolic events, guidelines recommend bridging therapy with heparin; however, case series suggest that it may be safe to perform surgery without interrupting warfarin treatment. There have been few results from clinical trials to support the safety and efficacy of this approach.

METHODS

We randomly assigned patients with an annual risk of thromboembolic events of 5% or more to continued warfarin treatment or to bridging therapy with heparin. The primary outcome was clinically significant device-pocket hematoma, which was defined as device-pocket hematoma that necessitated prolonged hospitalization, interruption of anticoagulation therapy, or further surgery (e.g., hematoma evacuation).

RESULTS

The data and safety monitoring board recommended termination of the trial after the second prespecified interim analysis. Clinically significant device-pocket hematoma occurred in 12 of 343 patients (3.5%) in the continued-warfarin group, as compared with 54 of 338 (16.0%) in the heparin-bridging group (relative risk, 0.19; 95% confidence interval, 0.10 to 0.36; P<0.001). Major surgical and thromboembolic complications were rare and did not differ significantly between the study groups. They included one episode of cardiac tamponade and one myocardial infarction in the heparin-bridging group and one stroke and one transient ischemic attack in the continued-warfarin group.

CONCLUSIONS

As compared with bridging therapy with heparin, a strategy of continued warfarin treatment at the time of pacemaker or ICD surgery markedly reduced the incidence of clinically significant device-pocket hematoma. (Funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care of Ontario; BRUISE CONTROL ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00800137.).