Societal views of pacemaker reutilization for those with untreated symptomatic bradycardia in underserved nations. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2011;30:261-266. [PMID: 21249438 DOI: 10.1007/s10840-010-9534-0]

Postmortem Protocols of Implantable Neurosurgical Devices: A Cross-Sectional Survey

BACKGROUND

Implantable devices are increasingly more common for management of movement disorders, pain, and epilepsy. These devices are often complex and constructed of nonbiodegradable or hazardous materials. Therefore, proper postmortem handling of these devices is exceedingly important. Unfortunately, there is no consolidated resource available for postmortem neuromodulation device protocols. Thus, we surveyed and catalogued the protocols for implantable devices to summarize proper postmortem device protocols for implantable neurosurgical devices currently on the market.

METHODS

We performed a cross-sectional study of companies producing commonly implanted neurosurgical devices. Using information from company websites, user manuals, and catalogs we categorized devices into 3 groups: A (formal recommendation for explantation), B (recommendation for explantation without formal company protocol), and C (explantation is not necessary). We then compiled the data into a stoplight diagram, providing a clear postmortem disposal algorithm for each device category.

RESULTS

Twelve companies were queried regarding 46 devices. Postmortem protocols were available for 50% (23/46) of devices; the remaining devices did not have formal recommendations. Overall, 50% of devices were classified as category A "red light" on the stoplight diagram based on recommendations, 10.9% as category B "yellow light," and the remaining 39.1% were classified as category C "green light" indicating they are safe to bury or cremate.

CONCLUSIONS

Evolution in therapies and growth in functional neurosurgery has expanded the range of implantable neurosurgical devices. We provide an educational document summarizing their postmortem protocols. This resource aims to aid health-care providers and encourage proper disposal practices during burial or cremation.

Social determinants of pacemaker reuse among patients and family members in Pakistan

OBJECTIVES

This survey aimed to quantify the opinions of CIED reuse among patients and family members in Pakistan and to identify the social determinants which may predict these views.

METHODS

A questionnaire formulating attitudes toward PPM reuse was administered to patients and family members at cardiology institutes in Pakistan from 1 July 2022 to 30 September 2022. The eligibility criteria (age > 18 years; inline for PPM placement) were taken into account and incomplete responses were excluded from the final analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 9,246 participants recorded their responses, of which 7,152 (78.16%) accepted pre-used PPMs. The lower social class had more PPM reuse acceptance rate than the middle and upper class (92.72% vs. 60.52% vs. 35.38%), respectively. Age ≥ 65 (OR(95%CI): 0.68 (0.41-0.99); P-value = 0.023), male gender (OR(95%CI): 0.55 (0.35-0.72), P-value = 0.016), unemployment (OR(95%CI): 0.47 (0.25-0.64); P-value = 0.007), poor health status (OR(95%CI): 0.72 (0.53-0.92); P-value = 0.041), and lower social class (OR(95%CI): 0.36 (0.28-0.53); P-value = 0.003) were social determinants of PPM reuse acceptance.

CONCLUSION

Patients and their family members endorse the concept of PPM reuse in Pakistan who cannot afford new devices.

Global disparities in arrhythmia care: Mind the gap

Delivery of comprehensive arrhythmia care requires the simultaneous presence of many resources. These include complex hospital infrastructure, expensive implantable equipment, and expert personnel. In many low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), at least 1 of these components is often missing, resulting in a gap between the demand for arrhythmia care and the capacity to supply care. In addition to this treatment gap, there exists a training gap, as many clinicians in LMICs have limited access to formal training in cardiac electrophysiology. Given the progressive increase in the burden of cardiovascular diseases in LMICs, these patient care and clinical training gaps will widen unless further actions are taken to build capacity. Several strategies for building arrhythmia care capacity in LMICs have been described. Medical missions can provide donations of both equipment and clinical expertise but are only intermittently present and therefore are not optimized to provide the longitudinal support needed to create self-sustaining infrastructure. Use of donated or reprocessed equipment (eg, cardiac implantable electronic devices) can reduce procedural costs but does not address the need for infrastructure, including diagnostics and expert personnel. Collaborative efforts involving multiple stakeholders (eg, professional organizations, government agencies, hospitals, and educational institutions) have the potential to provide longitudinal support of both patient care and clinician education in LMICs.

Advancing global equity in cardiac care as cardiac implantable electronic device reuse comes of age

A nation's health and economic development are inextricably and synergistically connected. Stark differences exist between wealthy and developing nations in the use of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). Cardiovascular disease is now the leading cause of death in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC), with a significant burden from rhythm-related diseases. As science, technology, education, and regulatory frameworks have improved, CIED recycling for exportation and reuse in LMIC has become possible and primed for widespread adoption. In our manuscript, we outline the science and regulatory pathways regarding CIED reuse. We propose a pathway to advance this technology that includes creating a task force to establish standards for CIED reuse, leveraging professional organizations in areas of need to foster the professional skills for CIED reuse, collaborating with regulatory agencies to create more efficient regulatory expectations and bring the concept to scale, and establishing a global CIED reuse registry for quality assurance and future science.

Patients' and Family Members' Views on Pacemaker Reuse: an International Survey

INTRODUCTION

The reuse of cardiac implantable electronic devices may help increase access to these therapies in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). No published data exist regarding the views of patients and family members in LMICs regarding this practice.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A paper questionnaire eliciting attitudes regarding pacemaker reuse was administered to ambulatory adult patients and patients' family members at outpatient clinics at Centro Nacional Cardiologia in Managua, Nicaragua, Indus Hospital in Karachi, Pakistan, Hospital Carlos Andrade Marín and Hospital Eugenio Espejo in Quito, Ecuador, and American University of Beirut Medical Center in Beirut, Lebanon. There were 945 responses (Nicaragua - 100; Pakistan - 493; Ecuador - 252; Lebanon - 100). A majority of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they would be willing to accept a reused pacemaker if risks were similar to a new device (707, 75%), if there were a higher risk of device failure compared to a new device (584, 70%), or if there were a higher risk of infection compared to a new device (458, 56%). A large majority would be willing to donate their own pacemaker at the time of their death (884, 96%) or the device of a family member (805, 93%). Respondents who were unable to afford a new device were more likely to be willing to accept a reused device (79% vs. 63%, P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients and their family members support the concept of pacemaker reuse for patients who cannot afford new devices. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Reuse of cardiac implantable electronic devices in developing countries perspectives: A literature review

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Access to cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) is limited in developing countries. Postmortem CIED donation from developed countries to developing countries could be an important resource for those who cannot afford a new one. The objective of this paper was to identify and synthesize the perspectives on the donation of CIEDs for potential reuse in patients without resources living in developing countries.

METHODS

A bibliographic review was carried out in the PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus databases. The search strategy was limited to articles published in English or Spanish.

RESULTS

Eight publications were analyzed. The main results were grouped into two large frameworks on perceptions, preferences, attitudes and opinions of developed countries and developing countries towards the donation and reuse of CIEDs. Positive perspectives were identified towards the donation of CIEDs for their reuse in the majority of patients with a CIED, relatives, funeral homes and physicians of developed countries, as well as in physicians and potential recipient patients of developing countries.

CONCLUSIONS

This review highlights the positive perspectives on CIED donation from developed countries to patients in need of developing countries among all studied groups. In view of the feasibility of collecting postmortem devices, we advocate studying the feasibility of more local CIED donation initiatives.

Cardiac Pacing in Sub-Saharan Africa: JACC International

Many parts of the developing world, especially Sub-Saharan Africa, completely lack access to cardiac pacing. The authors initiated a multinational program to implement cardiac pacing in 14 countries in Sub-Saharan Africa (1996 to 2018), aiming to eventually build self-sustainable capacity in each country. This was based on an "on-site training" approach of performing procedures locally and educating local health care teams to work within resource-limited settings, with prospective evaluation of the program. In 64 missions, a total of 542 permanent pacemakers were implanted. In 11 of these countries, the first pacemaker implant in the country was through the mission. More than one-half of those initially listed as suitable died before the mission(s) arrived. The proportion of implantations that were completely handled by local teams increased from 3% in 1996 to 98% in 2018. These findings demonstrate the feasibility and effectiveness of a proctorship-based approach to the development of local cardiac pacing capabilities in Sub-Saharan African nations.

Infections Associated with Resterilized Pacemakers and Defibrillators

BACKGROUND

Access to pacemakers and defibrillators is problematic in places with limited resources. Resterilization and reuse of implantable cardiac devices obtained post mortem from patients in wealthier nations have been undertaken, but uncertainty around the risk of infection is a concern.

METHODS

A multinational program was initiated in 1983 to provide tested and resterilized pacemakers and defibrillators to underserved nations; a prospective registry was established in 2003. Patients who received reused devices in this program were matched in a 1:3 ratio with control patients who received new devices implanted in Canada. The primary outcome was infection or device-related death, with mortality from other causes modeled as a competing risk.

RESULTS

Resterilized devices were implanted in 1051 patients (mean [±SD] age, 63.2±18.5 years; 43.6% women) in Mexico (36.0%), the Dominican Republic (28.1%), Guatemala (26.6%), and Honduras (9.3%). Overall, 85% received pacemakers and 15% received defibrillators, with one (55.5%), two (38.8%), or three (5.7%) leads. Baseline characteristics did not differ between these patients and the 3153 matched control patients. At 2 years of follow-up, infections had occurred in 21 patients (2.0%) with reused devices and in 38 (1.2%) with new devices (hazard ratio, 1.66; 95% confidence interval, 0.97 to 2.83; P = 0.06); there were no device-related deaths. The most common implicated pathogens were Staphylococcus aureus and S. epidermidis.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients in underserved countries who received a resterilized and reused pacemaker or defibrillator, the incidence of infection or device-related death at 2 years was 2.0%, an incidence that did not differ significantly from that seen among matched control patients with new devices in Canada.

Worldwide pacemaker and defibrillator reuse: Systematic review and meta-analysis of contemporary trials

BACKGROUND

Patients go without pacemaker, defibrillator, and cardiac resynchronization therapies (devices) each year due to the prohibitive costs of devices.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to examine data available from studies regarding contemporary risks of reused devices in comparison with new devices.

METHODS

We searched online indexing sites to identify recent studies. Peer-reviewed manuscripts reporting infection, malfunction, premature battery depletion, and device-related death with reused devices were included. The primary study outcome was the composite risk of infection, malfunction, premature battery depletion, and death. Secondary outcomes were the individual risks.

RESULTS

Nine observational studies (published 2009-2017) were identified totaling 2,302 devices (2,017 pacemakers, 285 defibrillators). Five controlled trials were included in meta-analysis (2,114 devices; 1,258 new vs 856 reused). All device reuse protocols employed interrogation to confirm longevity and functionality, disinfectant therapy, and, usually, additional biocidal agents, packaging, and ethylene oxide gas sterilization. Demographic characteristics, indications for pacing, and median follow-up were similar. There were no device-related deaths reported and no statistically significant difference in risk between new versus reused devices for the primary outcome (2.23% vs 3.86% respectively, P = 0.807, odds ratio = 0.76). There were no significant differences seen in the secondary outcomes for the individual risks of infection, malfunction, and premature battery depletion.

CONCLUSIONS

Device reuse utilizing modern protocols did not significantly increase risk of infection, malfunction, premature battery depletion, or device-related death in observational studies. These data provide rationale for proceeding with a prospective multicenter noninferiority randomized control trial.

Pacemaker recycling: A notion whose time has come

The purpose of this paper is to summarize the need, feasibility, safety, legality, and ethical perspectives of pacemaker reutilization in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). It will also describe, in-depth, Project My Heart Your Heart (PMHYH) as a model for pacemaker reuse in LMICs. The primary source of the discussion points in this paper is a collection of 14 publications produced by the research team at the University of Michigan and its collaborative partners. The need for pacemaker reutilization in LMICs is evident. Numerous studies show that the concept of pacemaker reutilization in LMICs is feasible. Infection and device malfunction are the main concerns in regard to pacemaker reutilization, yet many studies have shown that pacemaker reuse is not associated with increased infection risk or higher mortality compared with new device implantation. Under the right circumstances, the ethical and legal bases for pacemaker reutilization are supported. PMHYH is a proof of concept pacemaker donation initiative that has allowed funeral home and crematory directors to send explanted devices to an academic center for evaluation and re-sterilization before donation to underserved patients in LMICs. The time is now to pursue large-scale studies and trials of pacemaker reuse for the betterment of society. PMHYH is leading the way in the effort and is poised to conduct a prospective randomized, non-inferiority, multicenter study to confirm the clinical efficacy and safety of pacemaker reuse, for clinical and legal support.

Cardiovascular implantable electronic device function and longevity at autopsy: an underestimated resource

BACKGROUND

The feasibility and safety of postmortem cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED; pacemaker or defibrillator) retrieval for reuse has been shown. To date, studies indicate a low yield of reusable postmortem CIEDs (17%-30%).

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to test the hypothesis that a higher rate of reusable CIEDs would be identified upon postmortem retrieval when an institutional protocol for systematic and routine acquisition, interrogation, reprogramming, and manufacturer analysis was used.

METHODS

Over a 6-year period, all subjects referred for autopsy underwent concomitant CIED pulse generator retrieval and enrollment in the Johns Hopkins Post-Mortem CIED Registry. CIEDs were interrogated, reprogrammed, and submitted for manufacturer analysis.

RESULTS

In total, 84 autopsies had CIEDs (37 pacemakers, 47 implantable cardioverter-defibrillators). CIEDs were implanted 2.84 ± 2.32 years before death, with 30% implanted <1 year before death. Overall, CIED postmortem longevity was 4.79 ± 3.41 years, with 56% demonstrating longevity ≥4 years (this group had an estimated mean longevity of 7.37 ± 2.44 years). Manufacturer analyses uncovered 2 falsely triggered elective replacement indication alerts, confirmed 5 correctly triggered elective replacement indication alerts, identified a recalled pacemaker, and verified that a defibrillator had undergone nonprogrammable hard reset.

CONCLUSION

When a protocol for systematic and routine postmortem CIED retrieval, interrogation, reprogramming, and analysis was used, we noted that >60% of pacemakers and >50% of defibrillators demonstrated normal functional status with projected longevities >7 years on average. Formation of a national hospital-based "CIED donor network" would facilitate larger scale charitable efforts in underserved countries.

Performance of re-used pacemakers and implantable cardioverter defibrillators compared with new devices at Groote Schuur Hospital in Cape Town, South Africa

OBJECTIVES

Little is known about the performance of re-used pacemakers and implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) in Africa. We sought to compare the risk of infection and the rate of malfunction of re-used pacemakers and ICDs with new devices implanted at Groote Schuur Hospital in Cape Town, South Africa.

METHODS

This was a retrospective case comparison study of the performance of re-used pacemakers and ICDs in comparison with new devices implanted at Groote Schuur Hospital over a 10-year period. The outcomes were incidence of device infection, device malfunction, early battery depletion, and device removal due to infection, malfunction, or early battery depletion.

RESULTS

Data for 126 devices implanted in 126 patients between 2003 and 2013 were analysed, of which 102 (81%) were pacemakers (51 re-used and 51 new) and 24 (19%) were ICDs (12 re-used and 12 new). There was no device infection, malfunction, early battery depletion or device removal in either the re-used or new pacemaker groups over the median follow up of 15.1 months [interquartile range (IQR), 1.3-36.24 months] for the re-used pacemakers, and 55.8 months (IQR, 20.3-77.8 months) for the new pacemakers. In the ICD group, no device infection occurred over a median follow up of 35.9 months (IQR, 17.0-70.9 months) for the re-used ICDs and 45.7 months (IQR, 37.6-53.7 months) for the new ICDs. One device delivered inappropriate shocks, which resolved without intervention and with no harm to the patient. This re-used ICD subsequently needed generator replacement 14 months later. In both the pacemaker and ICD groups, there were no procedure-non-related infections documented for the respective follow-up periods.

CONCLUSION

No significant differences were found in performance between re-used and new pacemakers and ICDs with regard to infection rates, device malfunction, battery life and device removal for complications. Pacemaker and ICD re-use is feasible and safe and is a viable option for patients with bradyarrhythmias and tachyarrthythmias.

Heart Rhythm Society members' views on pacemaker and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator reuse

BACKGROUND

Reuse of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) may help address the unmet need among patients in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).

METHODS

To examine Heart Rhythm Society (HRS) physicians' opinions regarding CIED reuse, an online survey eliciting attitudes toward CIED reuse was sent to all 3,380 HRS physician members.

RESULTS

There were 429 responses (response rate 13%). A large majority of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that resterilization of devices for reimplantation in patients who cannot afford new devices may be safe (370, 87%) and, if proven to be safe, would be ethical (375, 88%). A total of 340 (81%) respondents would be comfortable asking their patients to consider donating their device, and 353 (84%) would be willing to reimplant a resterilized device if it were legal. The most commonly cited concerns about device reuse were infection (270, 64%) and device malfunction (125, 29%). Respondents from the United States and Canada had more favorable impressions of device reuse than respondents from other high-income countries (P < 0.05 for three of five positive statements regarding reuse), and were less likely to cite ethical concerns (P < 0.001). However, when responses from all high-income countries were compared with lower- and upper-middle income countries, there were no significant differences in the rates of approval.

CONCLUSIONS

HRS survey respondents support the concept of CIED reuse for patients in LMICs who cannot afford new devices. Studies are needed to demonstrate the clinical efficacy and safety of this practice and to identify potential barriers to adoption among physicians.

Pacemaker reuse for patients in resource poor countries: is something always better than nothing?

Cardiovascular disease is the most common cause of death across the globe. Large disparities in access to cardiovascular care exist in the world. An estimated one million people die each year due to lack of access to life saving pacemaker therapy. We discuss the concept of justice in health and health care as it relates to the use of refurbished pacemakers in patients in low- and middle- income countries, where financial circumstances severely limit access to brand new devices. Egalitarianism, utilitarianism, and justice as fairness are examined, as they relate to provision of re-processed pacemakers. This practice, since it holds promise to improve human functioning and capabilities, can be morally justified with some conditions: transparency, further research in is its safety and efficacy, and its impact on other needs and priorities in those countries.

Reuse of medical devices: implications for infection control

Reuse of both single-use and multiuse medical devices is a common practice and can result in transmission of infection when appropriate sterilization or reprocessing does not occur. Reuse of single-use devices can be problematic because there are no clear standards for reprocessing, although data regarding adverse outcomes are limited. Single-use devices are commonly reused, appropriately or inappropriately, in resource-limited settings because of cost constraints. Reuse of medical devices raises important legal and ethical questions.

Reuse of explanted permanent pacemakers donated by funeral homes

Poor patients in developing countries may not receive permanent pacemakers (PPMs) even as lifesaving measures because of their high cost. In this report we examined whether PPMs that were explanted and donated by funeral homes in the United States could be safely and effectively reused in indigent patients in India. With permission from the deceased patients' families, 121 PPMs were explanted and donated by funeral homes for reuse. These PPMs were sterilized and sent for implantation in needy and indigent patients at a charity hospital in Mumbai, India. From the pool of donated 121 PPMs, 53 (88%, 11 single-chamber PPMs, 21%, and 42 dual-chamber PPMs, 79%) were acceptable for reuse and implanted (37 new implants, 70%, and 16 for battery/generator replacement, 30%) in 53 patients (mean ± SD 64 ± 10 years old, 28 women, 53%). Indications for PPM implantation were complete heart block (n = 27, 51%) and sick sinus syndrome (n = 26, 49%). All patients were alive and well postoperatively. No significant complications including infections or device failures occurred over 19 to 1,827 days (mean 661) of follow-up. Of 40 patients (75%) who were followed locally, 4 (10%) died because of nonpacemaker-related causes; time to death was 121 to 750 days (mean 430) after PPM implantation. All except 2 patients (5%) reported marked improvement in their symptoms. There were only 4 patients (8%) who were previously employed, and all were able to resume their manual labor work. Also, of the women, 27 patients (96%) reported improvement in symptoms enabling them to resume regular household chores as housewives after PPM implantation. In conclusion, with proper device sterilization and handling protocols, reuse of explanted PPMs in poor patients in developing countries is safe and effective. Implantation of donated PPMs can not only save lives but also improve quality of life of needy poor patients.

Feasibility of postmortem device acquisition for potential reuse in underserved nations

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of the present study was to examine the feasibility and efficacy of a program to acquire devices with adequate battery life from crematories and funeral homes for potential reutilization in underserved nations.

BACKGROUND

There exists a great health-care disparity between the industrialized world and underserved nations--specifically in the frequency of pacemaker implantation.

METHODS

Flyers were mailed to all 1057 members of the Michigan Funeral Directors Association providing information to download a consent-for-explant form and request a postage-paid envelope from www.myheartyourheart.org in order to send explanted devices. Donated devices from funeral homes and crematories nationwide were also collected from World Medical Relief. Adequate battery life was defined as ≥75% or ≥4 years of estimated longevity.

RESULTS

A total of 3176 devices (65% pacemakers, 21% implantable cardioverter-defibrillators [ICDs], 12% biventricular ICDs, and 3% biventricular pacemakers) were donated to the reutilization program. Five hundred fifty devices (21%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 19.4-22.6%) were found to have an acceptable battery life for reutilization. Among these devices, 313 were pacemakers (17.9%; 95% CI 16.1-19.8%), 118 were ICDs (17.9%; 95% CI 15.1-21.1%), 112 were biventricular ICDs (30.3%; 95% CI 25.6-35.2%), and 7 were biventricular pacemakers (17.3%; 95% CI 16.0-18.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately 21% of donated devices and 30% of donated biventricular ICDs possess an adequate battery life for potential reuse. Device donations from funeral homes and crematories appear to be a potential resource for device reutilization for those in need in underserved nations.