Impact of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Infection: A Clinical and Economic Analysis of the WRAP-IT Trial

Surgical skill simulation training to proficiency reduces procedural errors among novice cardiac device implanters: a randomized study

AIMS

In cardiac device implantation, having both surgical skills and ability to manipulate catheter/lead/wire is crucial. Few cardiologists, however, receive formal surgical training prior to implanting. Skills are mostly acquired directly on-the-job and surgical technique varies across institutions; suboptimal approaches may increase complications. We investigated how novel proficiency-based progression (PBP) simulation training impacts the surgical quality of implantations, compared to traditional simulation (SIM) training.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In this international prospective study, novice implanters were randomized (blinded) 1:1 to participate in a simulation-based procedure training curriculum, with proficiency demonstration requirements for advancing (PBP approach) or without (SIM). Ultimately, trainees performed the surgical tasks of an implant on a porcine tissue that was video-recorded and then scored by two independent assessors (blinded to group), using previously validated performance metrics. Primary outcomes were the number of procedural Steps Completed, Critical Errors, Errors (non-critical), and All Errors Combined. Thirty novice implanters from 10 countries participated. Baseline experiences were similar between groups. Compared to SIM-trained, the PBP-trained group completed on average 11% more procedural Steps (P < 0.001) and made 61.2% fewer Critical Errors (P < 0.001), 57.1% fewer Errors (P = 0.140), and 60.7% fewer All Errors Combined (P = 0.001); 11/15 (73%) PBP trainees demonstrated the predefined target performance level vs. 3/15 SIM trainees (20%) in the video-recorded performance.

CONCLUSION

Proficiency-based progression training produces superior objectively assessed novice operators' surgical performance in device implantation compared with traditional (simulation) training. Systematic PBP incorporation into formal academic surgical skills training is recommended before in vivo device practice. Future studies will quantify PBP training's effect on surgery-related device complications.

Clinical impact of capsulectomy during cardiac implantable electronic device generator replacement: a prospective randomized trial

BACKGROUND

The avascular capsule around the generator of the cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) could be susceptible to bacterial colonization and source of infection. Capsulectomy during CIED generator replacement may be beneficial in preventing device infection, but there is a lack of evidence.

METHODS

This prospective randomized trial, conducted from December 2013 to December 2019, included 195 patients divided equally into two groups. In the intervention group (n = 97), capsule removal was performed on the floor of the pocket, while it was not performed in the control group (n = 98). In both groups, swab culture was performed in the pocket. The primary outcome was the occurrence of device infection requiring pocket revision.

RESULTS

A total of 195 patients were included (mean age 70.2 ± 13.6 years, 55.4% women), with an average follow-up period of 54.3 ± 28.9 months. Among 182 patients undergoing microbiological cultures of pockets, 19 (10.4%) were confirmed positive, and Staphylococcus species were identified most frequently. The primary outcome occurred in 4 (2.1%), and there was no significant difference between the two groups (3.1% vs. 1.0%, p = 0.606). Hematoma has occurred in 10 patients (3.1% vs. 7.1%, p = 0.338), one of them required wound revision. In multivariable analysis, the occurrence of hematoma was the only independent risk factor associated with device infection (HR 13.6, 95% CI 1.02-181.15, p = 0.048).

CONCLUSIONS

In this long-term prospective study, capsulectomy during the replacement of the generator did not reduce the incidence of device infection. There was no association between bacterial colonization in the capsule around the generator and CIED infection.

Infective endocarditis associated with left atrial appendage occlusion device: a contemporary systematic review

BACKGROUND

Data are limited regarding infective endocarditis (IE) complicating left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) device procedures. This systematic review examines the etiology, diagnosis, and management of infective endocarditis (IE) following LAAO.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of six databases was performed between 2007 and 2022. In selecting studies, articles were included if they provided information about IE complicating LAAO, with relevant clinical and imaging details. Articles were excluded if they were editorials, study protocols, letters, or abstracts.

RESULTS

We identified seven cases of IE complicating LAAO published between 2007 and 2022, from the United States and Europe, highlighting the exceedingly rare reported incidence of the condition. Staphylococcus aureus is the predominant organism implicated in LAAO infections. Echocardiography is a key imaging modality for diagnosing LAAO IE. Both antibiotic therapy and surgical intervention in appropriate patients are important for managing LAAO device-related IE.

CONCLUSIONS

The limited data in the current literature regarding LAAO IE underscores the need for prospective clinical trials to establish evidence-based guidelines for infection prophylaxis, diagnosis, and management. Our findings emphasize the importance of vigilance for device-related infections, especially as the use of LAAO devices continues to grow worldwide.

Chronic kidney disease and transvenous cardiac implantable electronic device infection-is there an impact on healthcare utilization, costs, disease progression, and mortality?

AIMS

Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infections are a burden to hospitals and costly for healthcare systems. Chronic kidney disease (CKD) increases the risk of CIED infections, but its differential impact on healthcare utilization, costs, and outcomes is not known.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This retrospective analysis used de-identified Medicare Fee-for-Service claims to identify patients implanted with a CIED from July 2016 to December 2020. Outcomes were defined as hospital days and costs within 12 months post-implant, post-infection CKD progression, and mortality. Generalized linear models were used to calculate results by CKD and infection status while controlling for other comorbidities, with differences between cohorts representing the incremental effect associated with CKD. A total of 584 543 patients had a CIED implant, of which 26% had CKD and 1.4% had a device infection. The average total days in hospital for infected patients was 23.5 days with CKD vs. 14.5 days (P < 0.001) without. The average cost of infection was $121 756 with CKD vs. $55 366 without (P < 0.001), leading to an incremental cost associated with CKD of $66 390. Infected patients with CKD were more likely to have septicaemia or severe sepsis than those without CKD (11.0 vs. 4.6%, P < 0.001). After infection, CKD patients were more likely to experience CKD progression (hazard ratio 1.26, P < 0.001) and mortality (hazard ratio 1.89, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Cardiac implantable electronic device infection in patients with CKD was associated with more healthcare utilization, higher cost, greater disease progression, and greater mortality compared to patients without CKD.

Cardiac implantable electronic devices and bloodstream infections: management and outcomes

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Bloodstream infection (BSI) of any cause may lead to device infection in cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) patients. Aiming for a better understanding of the diagnostic approach, treatment, and outcome, patients with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) and cardiac resynchronization therapy and defibrillator (CRT-D) hospitalized with BSI were investigated.

METHODS

This is a single-centre, retrospective, cohort analysis including consecutive ICD/CRT-D patients implanted between 2012 and 2021. These patients were screened against a list of all hospitalized patients having positive blood cultures consistent with diagnosed infection in any department of a local public hospital.

RESULTS

The total cohort consisted of 515 patients. Over a median follow-up of 59 months (interquartile range 31-87 months), there were 47 BSI episodes in 36 patients. The majority of patients with BSI (92%) was admitted to non-cardiology units, and in 25 episodes (53%), no cardiac imaging was performed. Nearly all patients (85%) were treated with short-term antibiotics, whereas chronic antibiotic suppression therapy (n = 4) and system extraction (n = 3) were less frequent. Patients with BSI had a nearly seven-fold higher rate (hazard ratio 6.7, 95% confidence interval 3.9-11.2; P < .001) of all-cause mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Diagnostic workup of defibrillator patients with BSI admitted to a non-cardiology unit is often insufficient to characterize lead-related endocarditis. The high mortality rate in these patients with BSI may relate to underdiagnosis and consequently late/absence of system removal. Efforts to increase an interdisciplinary approach and greater use of cardiac imaging are necessary for timely diagnosis and adequate treatment.

New advances in management and treatment of cardiac implantable electronic devices infections

Cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) are increasingly used worldwide, and infection of these devices remains one of the most feared complications.CIED infections (CDIs) represent a challenge for physicians and the healthcare system in general as they require prolonged hospitalization and antibiotic treatment and are burdened by high mortality and high costs, so management of CDIs must be multidisciplinary.The exact incidence of CDIs is difficult to define, considering that it is influenced by various factors mainly represented by the implanted device and the type of procedure. Risk factors for CDIs could be divided into three categories: device related, patient related, and procedural related and the etiology is mainly sustained by Gram-positive bacteria; however, other etiologies cannot be underestimated. As a matter of fact, the two cornerstones in the treatment of these infections are device removal and antimicrobial treatment. Finally, therapeutic drug monitoring and PK/PD correlations should be encouraged in all patients with CDIs receiving antibiotic therapy and may result in a better clinical outcome and a reduction in antibiotic resistance and economic costs.In this narrative review, we look at what is new in the management of these difficult-to-treat infections.

The BLISTER Score: A Novel, Externally Validated Tool for Predicting Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Infections, and Its Cost-Utility Implications for Antimicrobial Envelope Use

BACKGROUND

Antimicrobial envelopes reduce the incidence of cardiac implantable electronic device infections, but their cost restricts routine use in the United Kingdom. Risk scoring could help to identify which patients would most benefit from this technology.

METHODS

A novel risk score (BLISTER [Blood results, Long procedure time, Immunosuppressed, Sixty years old (or younger), Type of procedure, Early re-intervention, Repeat procedure]) was derived from multivariate analysis of factors associated with cardiac implantable electronic device infection. Diagnostic utility was assessed against the existing PADIT score (Prior procedure, Age, Depressed renal function, Immunocompromised, Type of procedure) in both standard and high-risk external validation cohorts, and cost-utility models examined different BLISTER and PADIT score thresholds for TYRX (Medtronic; Minneapolis, MN) antimicrobial envelope allocation.

RESULTS

In a derivation cohort (n=7383), cardiac implantable electronic device infection occurred in 59 individuals within 12 months of a procedure (event rate, 0.8%). In addition to the PADIT score constituents, lead extraction (hazard ratio, 3.3 [95% CI, 1.9-6.1]; P<0.0001), C-reactive protein >50 mg/L (hazard ratio, 3.0 [95% CI, 1.4-6.4]; P=0.005), reintervention within 2 years (hazard ratio, 10.1 [95% CI, 5.6-17.9]; P<0.0001), and top-quartile procedure duration (hazard ratio, 2.6 [95% CI, 1.6-4.1]; P=0.001) were independent predictors of infection. The BLISTER score demonstrated superior discriminative performance versus PADIT in the standard risk (n=2854, event rate: 0.8%, area under the curve, 0.82 versus 0.71; P=0.001) and high-risk validation cohorts (n=1961, event rate: 2.0%, area under the curve, 0.77 versus 0.69; P=0.001), and in all patients (n=12 198, event rate: 1%, area under the curve, 0.8 versus 0.75, P=0.002). In decision-analytic modeling, the optimum scenario assigned antimicrobial envelopes to patients with BLISTER scores ≥6 (10.8%), delivering a significant reduction in infections (relative risk reduction, 30%; P=0.036) within the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence cost-utility thresholds (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, £18 446).

CONCLUSIONS

The BLISTER score (https://qxmd.com/calculate/calculator_876/the-blister-score-for-cied-infection) was a valid predictor of cardiac implantable electronic device infection, and could facilitate cost-effective antimicrobial envelope allocation to high-risk patients.

Factors associated with foreign body infection in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia

Background

We aimed to compare patient characteristics, MRSA sequence types, and biofilm production of MRSA strains that did and did not cause a foreign body infection in patients with MRSA bloodstream infections (BSI).

Methods

All adult patients with MRSA BSI hospitalized in two hospitals were identified by clinical microbiology laboratory surveillance. Only patients who had at least one implanted foreign body during the episode of BSI were included.

Results

In July 2018 - March 2022, of 423 patients identified with MRSA BSI, 118 (28%) had ≥1 foreign body. Among them, 51 (43%) had one or more foreign body infections. In multivariable analysis, factors associated with foreign body infection were history of MRSA infection in the last year (OR=4.7 [1.4-15.5], p=0.012) community-associated BSI (OR=68.1 [4.2-1114.3], p=0.003); surgical site infection as source of infection (OR=11.8 [2-70.4], p=0.007); presence of more than one foreign body (OR=3.4 [1.1-10.7], p=0.033); interval between foreign body implantation and infection <18 months (OR=3.3 [1.1-10], p=0.031); and positive blood culture ≥48h (OR=16.7 [4.3-65.7], p<0.001). The most prevalent sequence type was ST8 (39%), followed by ST5 (29%), and ST105 (20%) with no significant difference between patients with or without foreign body infection. Only 39% of MRSA isolates formed a moderate/strong biofilm. No significant difference was observed between patients with foreign body infection and those without foreign body infection. In multivariable analysis, subjects infected with a MRSA isolate producing moderate/strong in vitro biofilm were more likely to have a history of MRSA infection in the last year (OR=3.41 [1.23-9.43]), interval between foreign body implantation and MRSA BSI <18 months (OR=3.1 [1.05-9.2]) and ST8 (OR=10.64 [2-57.3]).

Conclusion

Most factors associated with foreign body infection in MRSA BSI were also characteristic of persistent infections. Biofilm-forming isolates were not associated with a higher risk of foreign-body infection but appeared to be associated with MRSA genetic lineage, especially ST8.

Contemporary Management of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Infection: The American College of Cardiology COGNITO Survey

Background

Cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) infection remains a serious complication, causing increased morbidity and mortality. Early recognition and escalation to definitive therapy including extraction of the infected device often pose challenges.

Objectives

The purpose of this study was to assess U.S.-based physicians current practices in diagnosing and managing CIED infections and explore potential extraction barriers.

Methods

An observational survey was performed by the American College of Cardiology including U.S. physicians managing CIEDs from February to March 2022. Sampling techniques and screener questions determined eligibility. The survey featured questions on knowledge and experience with CIED infection patients and case scenarios.

Results

Of 387 physicians completing the survey (20% response rate), 49% indicated familiarity with current guidelines regarding CIED infection. Electrophysiologists (EPs) (91%) were more familiar with these guidelines, compared to non-EP cardiologists (29%) and primary care physicians (23%). Only 30% of physicians specified that their institution had guideline-based protocols in place for managing patients with CIED infection. When presented with pocket infection cases, approximately 89% of EPs and 50% of non-EP cardiologists would follow guideline recommendation to do complete CIED system removal, while 70% of primary care physicians did not recommend guideline-directed treatment.

Conclusions

There are gaps in familiarity of guidelines as well as the knowledge in practical management of CIED infection with non-extracting physicians. Most institutions lack a definite pathway. Addressing discrepancies, including guideline education and streamlining care or referral pathways, will be a key factor to bridging the gap and improving CIED infection patient outcomes.

Economic analyses in cardiac electrophysiology: from clinical efficacy to cost utility

Cardiac electrophysiology is an evolving field that relies heavily on costly device- and catheter-based technologies. An increasing number of patients with heart rhythm disorders are becoming eligible for cardiac interventions, not least due to the rising prevalence of atrial fibrillation and increased longevity in the population. Meanwhile, the expansive costs of healthcare face finite societal resources, and a cost-conscious approach to new technologies is critical. Cost-effectiveness analyses support rational decision-making in healthcare by evaluating the ratio of healthcare costs to health benefits for competing therapies. They may, however, be subject to significant uncertainty and bias. This paper aims to introduce the basic concepts, framework, and limitations of cost-effectiveness analyses to clinicians including recent examples from clinical electrophysiology and device therapy.

Tricuspid valve disease and cardiac implantable electronic devices

The role of cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED)-related tricuspid regurgitation (TR) is increasingly recognized as an independent clinical entity. Hence, interventional TR treatment options continuously evolve, surgical risk assessment and peri-operative care improve the management of CIED-related TR, and the role of lead extraction is of high interest. Furthermore, novel surgical and interventional tricuspid valve treatment options are increasingly applied to patients suffering from TR associated with or related to CIEDs. This multidisciplinary review article developed with electrophysiologists, interventional cardiologists, imaging specialists, and cardiac surgeons aims to give an overview of the mechanisms of disease, diagnostics, and proposes treatment algorithms of patients suffering from TR associated with CIED lead(s) or leadless pacemakers.

Lead Extraction and Mortality Among Patients With Cardiac Implanted Electronic Device Infection

Importance

Complete hardware removal is a class I recommendation for cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) infection, but practice patterns and outcomes remain unknown.

Objective

To quantify the number of Medicare patients with CIED infections who underwent implantation from 2006 to 2019 and lead extraction from 2007 to 2019 to analyze the outcomes in these patients in a nationwide clinical practice cohort.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study included fee-for-service Medicare Part D beneficiaries from January 1, 2006, to December 31, 2019, who had a de novo CIED implantation and a CIED infection more than 1 year after implantation. Data were analyzed from January 1, 2005, to December 31, 2019.

Exposure

A CIED infection, defined as (1) endocarditis or infection of a device implant and (2) documented antibiotic therapy.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcomes of interest were device infection, device extraction, and all-cause mortality. Time-varying multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to evaluate the association between extraction and survival.

Results

Among 1 065 549 patients (median age, 78.0 years [IQR, 72.0-84.0 years]; 50.9% male), mean (SD) follow-up was 4.6 (2.9) years after implantation. There were 11 304 patients (1.1%) with CIED infection (median age, 75.0 years [IQR, 67.0-82.0 years]); 60.1% were male, and 7724 (68.3%) had diabetes. A total of 2102 patients with CIED infection (18.6%) underwent extraction within 30 days of diagnosis. Infection occurred a mean (SD) of 3.7 (2.4) years after implantation, and 1-year survival was 68.3%. There was evidence of highly selective treatment, as most patients did not have extraction within 30 days of diagnosed infection (9202 [81.4%]), while 1511 (13.4%) had extraction within 6 days of diagnosis and 591 (5.2%) had extraction between days 7 and 30. Any extraction was associated with lower mortality compared with no extraction (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 0.82; 95% CI, 0.74-0.90; P < .001). Extraction within 6 days was associated with even lower risk of mortality (AHR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.61-0.78; P < .001).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this study, a minority of patients with CIED infection underwent extraction. Extraction was associated with a lower risk of death compared with no extraction. The findings suggest a need to improve adherence to guideline-directed care among patients with CIED infection.

Is Infectious Endocarditis Evolving into a Time-Dependent Diagnosis in the Contemporary Epidemiological Era? Emphasis on the Role of Echocardiography as a First-Line Diagnostic Approach

Despite significant advances in understanding and outcomes in various domains of cardiology, the prognosis of infective endocarditis (IE) remains dismal. One of the main reasons may rely on an even more intricate diagnosis since epidemiology has shifted towards an aggressive infection, typically in older patients with the involvement of prosthetic valves and cardiovascular implantable electronic devices with earlier clinical presentation. In this novel setting, it is critical to avoid a delay in diagnosis that may delay subsequent adequate treatment, further complications, and ultimately poor clinical outcomes. Accordingly, based on the available data, we will examine the proper use of first-line echocardiography representing the first-line imaging method in patients with clinical suspicion of IE. We will focus on the following three crucial questions: (1) What is the threshold to start the echocardiographic diagnostic workup in stable patients? (2) Has infective endocarditis become a time-dependent diagnosis, even in stable patients? (3) What is the appropriate use of echocardiography in unstable patients? Finally, we propose a new mindset to improve the echocardiographic diagnostic workflow.

Real-world evidence on the association between cardiac implantable electronic device infection and all-cause mortality

AIMS

An infection following cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) procedure is a serious complication, but its association with all-cause mortality is inconsistent across observational studies. To quantify the association between CIED infection and all-cause mortality in a large, contemporary cohort from New South Wales, Australia.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This retrospective cohort study used linked hospital and mortality data and included all patients aged >18 years who underwent a CIED procedure between July 2017 and September 2022. Cardiac implantable electronic device infection was defined by the presence of relevant diagnosis codes. Cox regression to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the association of CIED infection with mortality, at 1-year, and at the end of follow-up, with CIED infection included as a time-dependent variable, and other potential risk factors for mortality included as fixed covariates. We followed 37,750 patients with CIED procedures {36% female, mean age [standard deviation (SD)] 75.8 [12.7] years}, and 487 (1.3%) CIED infections were identified. We observed 5771 (15.3%) deaths during an average follow-up of 25.2 (SD 16.8) months. Compared with no infection group, patients with CIED infection had a higher Kaplan-Meier mortality rate (19.4 vs. 6.8%) and adjusted hazard of mortality (aHR 2.73, 95% CI 2.10-3.54) at 12 months post-procedure. These differences were attenuated but still remained significant at the end of follow-up (aHR 1.83, 95% CI 1.52-2.19).

CONCLUSION

In a complete, state-wide cohort of CIED patients, infection was associated with higher risks of both short-term and long-term mortality.

Risk of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Infection in Patients with Bloodstream Infection: Microbiologic Effect in the Era of Positron Emission Tomography-Computed Tomography

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Bloodstream infection (BSI) in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) is common and can prompt challenges in defining optimal management. We provide a contemporary narrative review of this topic and propose a pathogen-dependent clinical approach to patient management.

RECENT FINDINGS

BSI due to staphylococci, viridans group streptococci, and enterococci is associated with an increased risk of underlying CIED infection, while the risk of CIED infection due to other organisms is poorly defined. There is growing evidence that positron emission tomography-computed tomography may be helpful in some patients with BSI and underlying CIED. Twenty studies were included to examine the impact of microbiologic findings on the risk of CIED infection among patients with BSI. Diagnosis of CIED infection in patients with BSI without pocket findings is often difficult, necessitating the use of novel diagnostic tools to help guide the clinician in subsequent patient management.

Effect of Metrics-Based Simulation Training to Proficiency on Procedure Quality and Errors Among Novice Cardiac Device Implanters: The IMPROF Randomized Trial

Importance

In cardiac device implant training, there is no common system to objectively assess trainees' ability to perform tasks at predetermined performance levels before in vivo practice; therefore, patients are potentially exposed to risks related to operators' early learning curve.

Objective

To assess the effect on implant performance quality of novel metrics-based simulation training to proficiency (proficiency-based progression [PBP]) vs traditional simulation-based training (SBT).

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this prospective randomized trial, conducted between March 8, 2022 and November 24, 2022, novice implanters were randomized (blinded) 1:1 to participate in an SBT curriculum (procedural knowledge e-learning and in-person simulation training) at an international skills training center, with proficiency demonstration requirements at each training stage for advancing (PBP approach) or without the requirements. Ultimately, trainees performed a cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) implant using virtual reality simulation. The procedure was video-recorded and subsequently scored using previously validated metrics by 2 independent assessors blinded to group. Physicians who had already implanted more than 20 pacemakers or defibrillators and fewer than 200 CRT systems as the first operator were eligible. Thirty-two implanters from 10 countries voluntarily enrolled in the training program and were randomized; 30 (15 per group) started and completed training. Data analysis was performed from November 27 to December 22, 2022.

Intervention

Training with PBP vs SBT.

Main Outcome and Measures

The primary outcome comprised 4 objectively assessed performance metrics derived from the video-recordings: number of procedural steps completed, errors, critical errors, and all errors combined.

Results

Baseline experience of the 30 participants (19 [63%] male; mean [SD] number of years in implant practice, 2.0 [1.8]; median [IQR] number of implanted pacemakers or defibrillators, 47.5 [30.0-115.0]; median [IQR] number of implanted CRT systems, 3.0 [1.25-10.0]) was similar between study groups. Compared with the SBT group, the PBP group completed 27% more procedural steps (median [IQR], 31 [30-32] vs 24 [22-27]; P < .001) and made 73% fewer errors (median [IQR], 2 [1-3] vs 7 [5-8]; P < .001), 84% fewer critical errors (median [IQR], 1 [0-1] vs 3 [3-5]; P < .001), and 77% fewer all errors combined (errors plus critical errors) (median [IQR], 3 [1-3] vs 11 [8-12]; P < .001); 14 of the 15 PBP trainees (93%) demonstrated the predefined target performance level vs 0 of the 15 SBT trainees.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this randomized trial, the PBP approach to novice implanter training generated superior objectively assessed performance vs SBT. If implemented broadly and systematically, PBP training may ensure safe and effective performance standards before trainees proceed to (supervised) in vivo practice. Future studies are needed to verify implications on procedure-related patient complications.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05952908.

Safety and Efficacy of a Single Procedure of Extraction and Reimplantation of Infected Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Device (CIED) in Comparison with Deferral Timing: An Observational Retrospective Multicentric Study

(1) Background: Infections are among the most frequent and life-threatening complications of cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation. The aim of this study is to compare the outcome and safety of a single-procedure device extraction and contralateral implantation versus the standard-of-care (SoC) two-stage replacement for infected CIEDs. (2) Methods: We retrospectively included 66 patients with CIED infections who were treated at two Italian hospitals. Of the 66 patients enrolled in the study, 27 underwent a single procedure, whereas 39 received SoC treatment. All patients were followed up for 12 months after the procedure. (3) Results: Considering those lost to follow-up, there were no differences in the mortality rates between the two cohorts, with survival rates of 81.5% in the single-procedure group and 84.6% in the SoC group (p = 0.075). (4) Conclusions: Single-procedure reimplantation associated with an active antibiofilm therapy may be a feasible and effective therapeutic option in CIED-dependent and frail patients. Further studies are warranted to define the best treatment regimen and strategies to select patients suitable for the single-procedure reimplantation.

Prevention of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Infections: A Review

The importance of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) in the treatment of cardiac rhythm disturbances, heart failure, and the prevention of sudden cardiac death is indisputable. However, CIED therapy is associated with complications, among which infections are particularly unfavourable in terms of prognosis. The diagnosis and management of CIED infections remain complex, with a significant impact on mortality and healthcare costs. For these reasons, the risk factors for CIED infections and methods of their prevention have been assessed in recent years. This review summarises the current state of knowledge on the subject. We also outlined the role of alternative methods, such as subcutaneous defibrillators, leadless pacemakers, and wearable cardioverter defibrillators.

Association of the Timing and Extent of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Infections With Mortality

Importance

Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infection is a potentially devastating complication with an estimated 12-month mortality of 15% to 30%. The association of the extent (localized or systemic) and timing of infection with all-cause mortality has not been established.

Objective

To evaluate the association of the extent and timing of CIED infection with all-cause mortality.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This prospective observational cohort study was conducted between December 1, 2012, and September 30, 2016, in 28 centers across Canada and the Netherlands. The study included 19 559 patients undergoing CIED procedures, 177 of whom developed an infection. Data were analyzed from April 5, 2021, to January 14, 2023.

Exposures

Prospectively identified CIED infections.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Time-dependent analysis of the timing (early [≤3 months] or delayed [3-12 months]) and extent (localized or systemic) of infection was performed to determine the risk of all-cause mortality associated with CIED infections.

Results

Of 19 559 patients undergoing CIED procedures, 177 developed a CIED infection. The mean (SD) age was 68.7 (12.7) years, and 132 patients were male (74.6%). The cumulative incidence of infection was 0.6%, 0.7%, and 0.9% within 3, 6, and 12 months, respectively. Infection rates were highest in the first 3 months (0.21% per month), reducing significantly thereafter. Compared with patients who did not develop CIED infection, those with early localized infections were not at higher risk for all-cause mortality (no deaths at 30 days [0 of 74 patients]: adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.64 [95% CI, 0.20-1.98]; P = .43). However, patients with early systemic and delayed localized infections had an approximately 3-fold increase in mortality (8.9% 30-day mortality [4 of 45 patients]: aHR, 2.88 [95% CI, 1.48-5.61]; P = .002; 8.8% 30-day mortality [3 of 34 patients]: aHR, 3.57 [95% CI, 1.33-9.57]; P = .01), increasing to a 9.3-fold risk of death for those with delayed systemic infections (21.7% 30-day mortality [5 of 23 patients]: aHR, 9.30 [95% CI, 3.82-22.65]; P < .001).

Conclusions and Relevance

Findings suggest that CIED infections are most common within 3 months after the procedure. Early systemic infections and delayed localized infections are associated with increased mortality, with the highest risk for patients with delayed systemic infections. Early detection and treatment of CIED infections may be important in reducing mortality associated with this complication.

Low Occurrence of Infections and Death in a Real-World Cohort of Patients with Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices

BACKGROUND

The incidence of infections and death in patients implanted with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) is not fully known yet.

AIM

To describe the incidence of CIED-related infection and death, and their potential predictors in a contemporary cohort of CIED patients.

METHODS

All consecutive patients implanted with a CIED at our institution were prospectively enrolled. Follow-up visits were performed 2 weeks after CIED implantation for all patients, and then every 6 months for implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD)/cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) patients and every 12 months for pacemaker (PM) patients. The adjudication of CIED-related infections was performed by two independent investigators and potential disagreement was resolved by a senior investigator.

RESULTS

Between September 2016 and August 2020, a total of 838 patients were enrolled (34.6% female; median age 77 (69.6-83.6); median PADIT score 2 (2-4)). PMs were implanted in 569 (68%) patients and ICD/CRT in 269 (32%) patients. All patients had pre-implant antibiotic prophylaxis and 5.5% had an antibiotic-eluting envelope. Follow-up data were available for 832 (99.2%) patients. After a median follow-up of 42.3 (30.2-56.4) months, five (0.6%) patients had a CIED-related infection and 212 (25.5%) patients died. Using multivariate Cox regression analysis, end-stage chronic kidney disease (CKD) requiring dialysis and therapy with corticosteroids was independently associated with a higher risk of infection (hazard ratio (HR): 14.20; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.48-136.62 and HR: 14.71; 95% CI 1.53-141.53, respectively). Age (HR: 1.07; 95% CI 1.05-1.09), end-stage CKD requiring dialysis (HR: 6.13; 95% CI 3.38-11.13) and history of atrial fibrillation (HR: 1.47; 95% CI 1.12-1.94) were independently associated with all-cause death.

CONCLUSIONS

In a contemporary cohort of CIED patients, mortality was substantially high and associated with clinical factors depicting a population at risk. On the other hand, the incidence of CIED-related infections was low.

Risk factors associated with higher mortality in patients with cardiac implantable electronic device infection

INTRODUCTION

Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices (CIEDs) are widely used for the management of advanced heart failure and ventricular arrhythmias. CIED-Infection (CIED-I) has very high mortality, especially in the subsets of patients with limited health-care access and delayed presentation. The purpose of this study is to identify the risk-predictors mortality in subjects with CIED-I.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of a regional database in patients presenting with CIED infections to tertiary care medical centers across Western New York, USA from 2012 to 2020. The clinical outcomes included recurrent device infection (any admission for CIED-I after the first hospitalization for device infection), septic complications (pulmonary embolism, respiratory failure, septic shock, decompensated HF, acute kidney injury) and mortality outcomes (death during hospitalization, within 30 days from CIED-I, and within 1 year from CIED-I). We studied associations between categorical variables and hard outcomes using χ2 tests and used one-way analysis of variance to measure between-groups differences.

RESULTS

We identified 296 patients with CIED-I, among which 218 (74%) were male, 237 (80%) were white and the mean age at the time of infection was 69.2 ± 13.7 years. One-third of the patients were referred from the regional facilities. Staphylococcus aureus was responsible for most infections, followed by Enterococcus fecalis. On multivariate analysis, the covariates associated with significantly increased mortality risk included referral from regional facility (OR: 2.0;1.0-4.0), hypertension (Odds ratio, OR: 3.2;1.3-8.8), right ventricular dysfunction (OR: 2.6;1.2-5.1), end-stage renal disease (OR: 2.6;1.1-6.2), immunosuppression (OR: 11.4;2.5-53.3), and septic shock as a complication of CIED-I (OR: 3.9;1.3-10.8).

CONCLUSION

Hypertension, right ventricular dysfunction, immunosuppression, and end-stage renal disease are associated with higher mortality after CIED-I. Disproportionately higher mortality was also noted in subjects referred from the regional facilities. This underscores the importance of early clinical risk-assessment, and the need for a robust referral infrastructure to improve patient outcomes.

Preclinical evaluation of a third-generation absorbable antibacterial envelope

BACKGROUND

The TYRX (Medtronic) absorbable antibacterial envelope has been shown to stabilize implantable cardiac devices and reduce infection. A third-generation envelope was developed to reduce surface roughness with a redesigned multifilament mesh and enhanced form factor but identical polymer coating and antibiotic concentrations as the currently available second-generation envelope.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare drug elution, bacterial challenge efficacy, stabilization, and absorption of second- vs third-generation envelopes.

METHODS

Antibiotic elution was assessed in vitro and in vivo. For efficacy against gram-positive/gram-negative bacteria, 40 rabbits underwent device insertions with or without third-generation envelopes. For stabilization (migration, rotation), 5 sheep were implanted with 6 devices each in second- or third-generation envelopes. Prespecified acceptance criteria were <83-mm migration and <90° rotation. Absorption was assessed via gross pathology.

RESULTS

Elution curves were equivalent (similarity factors ≥50 per Food and Drug Administration guidance). Third-generation envelopes eluted antibiotics above minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) in vivo at 2 hours postimplant through 7 days, consistent with second-generation envelopes. Bacterial challenge showed reductions (P <.05) in infection with second- and third-generation envelopes. Device migration was 5.5 ± 3.5 mm (third-generation) vs 9. 9 ±7.9 mm (second-generation) (P <.05). Device rotation was 18.9° ± 11.4° (third-generation) vs 17.6° ± 15.1° (second-generation) and did not differ (P = .79). Gross pathology confirmed the absence of luminal mesh remainders and no differences in peridevice fibrosis at 9 or 12 weeks.

CONCLUSION

The third-generation TYRX absorbable antibacterial envelope demonstrated equivalent preclinical performance to the second-generation envelope. Antibiotic elution curves were similar, elution was above MIC for 7 days, infections were reduced compared to no envelope, and acceptance criteria for migration, rotation, and absorption were met.

Efficacy of the antibacterial envelope to prevent cardiac implantable electronic device infection in a high-risk population

AIMS

Infection is a serious complication of cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) therapy. An antibiotic-eluting absorbable envelope has been developed to reduce the infection rate, but studies investigating the efficacy and a reasonable number needed to treat in high-risk populations for infections are limited.

METHODS AND RESULTS

One hundred and forty-four patients undergoing CIED implantation who received the antibacterial envelope were compared with a matched cohort of 382 CIED patients from our institution. The primary outcome was the occurrence of local infection, and secondary outcomes were any CIED-related local or systemic infections, including endocarditis, and all-cause mortality. The results were stratified by a risk score for CIED infection, PADIT. The envelope group had a higher PADIT score, 5.9 ± 3.1 vs. 3.9 ± 3.0 (P < 0.0001). For the primary endpoint, no local infections occurred in the envelope group, compared with 2.6% in the control group (P = 0.04), with a more pronounced difference in the stratum with a high (>7 points) PADIT score, 0 vs. 9.9% (P = 0.01). The total CIED-related infections were similar between groups, 6.3% compared with 5.0% (P = 0.567). Mortality after 1600 days of follow-up did not differ between groups, 22.9 vs. 26.4%, P = 0.475.

CONCLUSION

Our study confirms the clinical efficacy of an antibacterial envelope in the prevention of local CIED infection in patients with a higher risk according to the PADIT score. In an effort to improve cost-benefit ratios, ration of use guided by the PADIT score is advocated. Further prospective randomized studies in high-risk populations are called for.

Bacteremia due to Non-Staphylococcus aureus Gram-positive Cocci and Risk of Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Device Infection

Background

Cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) infection carries significant morbidity and mortality with bacteremia being a possible marker of device infection. A clinical profile of non-Staphylococcus aureus gram-positive cocci (non-SA GPC) bacteremia in patients with CIED has been limited.

Objective

To examine characteristics of patients with CIED who developed non-SA GPC bacteremia and risk of CIED infection.

Methods

We reviewed all patients with CIED who developed non-SA GPC bacteremia at the Mayo Clinic between 2012 and 2019. The 2019 European Heart Rhythm Association Consensus Document was used to define CIED infection.

Results

A total of 160 patients with CIED developed non-SA GPC bacteremia. CIED infection was present in 90 (56.3%) patients, in whom 60 (37.5%) were classified as definite and 30 (18.8%) as possible. This included 41 (45.6%) cases of coagulase-negative Staphylococcus (CoNS), 30 (33.3%) cases of Enterococcus, 13 (14.4%) cases of viridans group streptococci (VGS), and 6 (6.7%) cases of other organisms. The adjusted odds of CIED infection in cases due to CoNS, Enterococcus, and VGS bacteremia were 19-, 14-, and 15-fold higher, respectively, as compared with other non-SA GPC. In patients with CIED infection, the reduction in risk of 1-year mortality associated with device removal was not statistically significant (hazard ratio 0.59; 95% confidence interval 0.26-1.33; P = .198).

Conclusions

The prevalence of CIED infection in non-SA GPC bacteremia was higher than previously reported, particularly in cases due to CoNS, Enterococcus species, and VGS. However, a larger cohort is needed to demonstrate the benefit of CIED extraction in patients with infected CIED due to non-SA GPC.

Risk of Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Device Infection in Patients Presenting with Gram-negative Bacteremia

Background

Gram-negative bacteremia (GNB) as a manifestation of cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) infection is uncommon. Moreover, echocardiography may be nonspecific in its ability to differentiate whether CIED lead masses are infected. We aimed to determine the rate of CIED infection in the setting of GNB.

Methods

All patients with CIED who were hospitalized with GNB during 2012–2019 at Mayo Clinic were investigated. The definition of CIED infection was based on criteria recommended by the 2019 European Heart Rhythm Association document.

Results

A total of 126 patients with CIED developed GNB. None of them had signs of pocket infection. Twenty (15.9%) patients underwent transesophageal echocardiography. Overall, 4 (3%) patients had definite CIED infection. None of them underwent CIED extraction; 3 died within 12 weeks and 1 received long-term antibiotic suppression. Ten (8%) patients had possible CIED infection; despite no CIED extraction, no patient had relapsing GNB. We observed a higher rate of CIED infection in patients with Serratia marcescens bacteremia as compared to that in patients with other GNB.

Conclusions

The rate of CIED infection following GNB was relatively low. However, accurate classification of CIED infection among patients presenting with GNB remains challenging, in part, due to a case definition of CIED infection that is characterized by a low pretest probability in the setting of GNB. Prospective, multicenter studies are needed to determine accurate identification of CIED infection among GNB, so that only patients with true infection undergo device removal.

Alternative Nuclear Imaging Tools for Infection Imaging

Purpose of Review

Cardiovascular infections are serious disease associated with high morbidity and mortality. Their diagnosis is challenging, requiring a proper management for a prompt recognition of the clinical manifestations, and a multidisciplinary approach involving cardiologists, cardiothoracic surgeons, infectious diseases specialist, imagers, and microbiologists. Imaging plays a central role in the diagnostic workout, including molecular imaging techniques. In this setting, two different strategies might be used to image infections: the first is based on the use of agents targeting the microorganism responsible for the infection. Alternatively, we can target the components of the pathophysiological changes of the inflammatory process and/or the host response to the infectious pathogen can be considered. Understanding the strength and limitations of each strategy is crucial to select the most appropriate imaging tool.

Recent Findings

Currently, multislice computed tomography (MSCT) and nuclear imaging (¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography, and leucocyte scintigraphy) are part of the diagnostic strategies. The main role of nuclear medicine imaging (PET/CT and SPECT/CT) is the confirmation of valve/CIED involvement and/or associated perivalvular infection and the detection of distant septic embolism. Proper patients’ preparation, imaging acquisition, and reconstruction as well as imaging reading are crucial to maximize the diagnostic information.

Summary

In this manuscript, we described the use of molecular imaging techniques, in particular WBC imaging, in patients with infective endocarditis, cardiovascular implantable electronic device infections, and infections of composite aortic graft, underlying the strength and limitations of such approached as compared to the other imaging modalities.

Safety and Efficacy of Submuscular Implantation With Resterilized Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device in Patients With Device Infection: A Retrospective Observational Study in Taiwan

Background

Reuse of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) can reduce the cost of using these expensive devices. However, whether resterilized CIEDs will increase the risk of reinfection in patients with previous device infection remains unknown. The aim of the present study is to compare the reinfection rates in patients who had initial CIED infection and underwent reimplantation of resterilized CIEDs or new devices.

Methods

Data from patients with initial CIED infection who received debridement of the infected pocket and underwent reimplantation of new or resterilized CIEDs at MacKay Memorial Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan, between January 2014 and June 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. Patient characteristics, relapse rates of infection, and potential contributing factors to the infection risk were examined.

Results

Twenty-seven patients with initial CIED infection and reimplanted new CIEDs (n = 11) or resterilized CIEDs (n = 16) were included. During the 2-year follow-up, there were 1 (9.1%) and 2 (12.5%) infection relapses in the new and resterilized CIED groups, respectively. No relapse occurred for either group if the lead was completely removed or cut short. The median duration between debridement and device reimplantation in patients with infection relapse vs patients without relapse was 97 vs 4.5 days for all included patients, and 97 vs 2 days and 50.5 vs 5.5 days for the new and resterilized CIED groups, respectively.

Conclusions

Subpectoral reimplanting of resterilized CIEDs in patients with previous device infection is safe and efficacious. With delicate debridement and complete extraction of the leads, the CIED pocket infection relapse risk can be greatly decreased.

Cost-Effectiveness of Antibiotic-Eluting Envelope for Prevention of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Infections in Heart Failure

BACKGROUND

Use of an antibiotic-eluting envelope (AEE) during cardiac implantable electronic device procedures reduces infection risk but increases procedural costs. We aim to estimate the cost-effectiveness of AEE use during cardiac implantable electronic device procedures among patients with heart failure.

METHODS

A state-transition cohort model of heart failure patients undergoing cardiac implantable electronic device implantation or generator replacement was developed with input parameters estimated from randomized trials, registries, surveys, and claims data. Effectiveness was estimated from the World-Wide Randomized Antibiotic Envelope Infection Prevention Trial. AEE was assumed to cost $953 per unit. The model projected mortality, quality-adjusted life-years, costs, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of AEE use compared with usual care from a US healthcare sector perspective over a lifetime horizon. We assumed a cost-effectiveness threshold of $100 000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained.

RESULTS

Compared with usual care, AEE use in initial implantations produced an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $112 000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained (39% probability of being cost-effective). In generator replacement procedures, AEE use produced an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $54 000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained (84% probability of being cost-effective). Results were sensitive to the underlying rate of infection, cost of the AEE, and durability of AEE effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

Universal AEE use for cardiac implantable electronic device procedures in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction is unlikely to be cost-effective, reinforcing the need for individualized risk assessment to guide uptake of the AEE in clinical practice. Selective use in patients at increased risk of infection, such as those undergoing generator replacement procedures, is more likely to meet health system value benchmarks.

A Unique Case of Elizabethkingia Associated Cardiac Device Infection

Elizabethkingia is a ubiquitous gram-negative aerobic bacillus that has gained attention in recent years as an emerging nosocomial infection in critically ill patients. We describe a case of bacteremia that developed in a patient who underwent complicated surgery with an extended intensive care unit (ICU) stay. The patient underwent pacemaker extraction with laser lead extraction and treatment with intravenous antibiotics. This case illustrates the importance of lead management strategies in septic patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED).

Healthcare costs in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator recipients: A real-life cohort study on 19,408 patients from the French national healthcare database

BACKGROUND

The aim is to report healthcare costs in a nationwide cohort of patients with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD).

METHODS

This real-life longitudinal retrospective cohort study was based on the French National Health Data System and enrolled all adult patients from the general health insurance scheme implanted with an ICD between 2008 and 2011, and followed them until 2018.

RESULTS

Overall, 19,408 patients were included (mean age 63.8, SD 12.4 years, 81.6% males), with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRTD), single-chamber, and dual-chamber ICD in 42.5%, 29.8%, 27.7% of patients, respectively. After a mean follow-up of 6.6 SD 3.3 years, 9514 patients (49.0%) died, and 8678 patients (44.7%) had their ICD replaced. The total healthcare cost (all diseases and injuries combined) was €15,893/patient-year, of which 32% were estimated to be ICD-related. These ICD-related costs were: the implantation hospital stay (representing 59% of the ICD-related costs), ICD replacement (22%), complications' management (11%), and follow-up (9%). Some health events (e.g., a complication during ICD replacement) were counted in two categories, hence the sum of the proportions is >100%. Being under 55 vs. above 75 years old, being treated for hypertension vs. not treated, and receiving a CRT-D vs. a single-chamber ICD each increased the mean total ICD-related cost per patient by approximately 20%; ICD replacement vs. no replacement increased it by 71%.

CONCLUSIONS

Almost two thirds of the total ICD patients' healthcare costs remained not ICD-related. Advancing the understanding of direct and indirect costs may help improving cost-effectiveness of patients' care pathway.

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.

Brucella cardiac implantable electronic device infection: A single-center case series

BACKGROUND

Cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs), including implantable cardiac defibrillators, pacemakers, and cardiac resynchronization therapy devices, are lifesaving. However, device infections can lead to morbidity and mortality. The aim of this study was to describe the outcome of Brucella CIED infections treated at our center, and to identify risk factors for Brucella infection in patients with CIEDs. Study Settings: Single-center study, Prince Sultan Military Medical City, Riyadh, KSA.

METHODS

This case series included all Brucella-related CIED infections treated at a tertiary care center between 2009 and 2020. Data on patient demographics, clinical manifestations, predisposing factors, microbiology, treatment regimens, and outcomes were reviewed.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients met the Brucella CIED infection criteria. The mean age was 62.2 years, and 80% were males. Common comorbidities included hypertension (73%), diabetes mellitus (67%), ischemic heart disease (47%), and chronic kidney disease (60%). The mean time to infection following the device implantation was 4.8 years (range: 5 months to 13 years). Fever was detected in 53% of patients, device site swelling in 47%, purulent discharge in 33%, and pain in 27%. The blood culture and serology results were positive in 73% and 80% of patients, respectively. All patients were treated with antibiotics, and the infected device was removed. Seven (46.6%) patients underwent reimplantation with a new device. One patient with dual Brucella and methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus infection died, and the other 14 patients recovered, with no recurrent infections reported to date.

CONCLUSION

Brucella should be considered in CIED infections, particularly in endemic areas. Proper treatment and device removal are essential for good outcomes.

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.

Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of an Absorbable Antibacterial Envelope for Use in Patients at Increased Risk of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Infection in Germany, Italy, and England

OBJECTIVES

To model the cost-effectiveness of the TYRX Absorbable Antibacterial Envelope when used in patients at increased risk of cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infection in the context of 3 European healthcare systems: Germany, Italy, and England.

METHODS

A decision tree model with a lifetime horizon was populated using data from the Worldwide Randomized Antibiotic Envelope Infection Prevention Trial, a large multicenter randomized controlled trial. Use of the antibacterial envelope adjunctive to standard of care was compared to standard of care infection prevention alone. Patients in the model were divided into subgroups based on presence of factors known to increase infection risk.

RESULTS

The antibacterial envelope had the most favorable cost-effectiveness profile when patients had previously experienced CIED infection, had a history of immunosuppressive therapy, or had a Prevention of Arrhythmia Device Infection Trial (PADIT) score indicating high risk of infection (scores ≥6) at cost-effectiveness thresholds of €50 000 in Germany (assumed in the absence of an official threshold), €40 000 in Italy, and £30 000 in England. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated that the antibacterial envelope was likely to be cost-effective in patients with other risk factors (including replacement of high power CIEDs, generator replacement with lead modification, and PADIT scores indicating intermediate risk of infection) when used with some device types and in some countries.

CONCLUSIONS

The absorbable antibacterial envelope was associated with cost-effectiveness ratios below European benchmarks in selected patients at increased risk of infection, suggesting the envelope provides value for European healthcare systems by reducing CIED infections.

Infections associated with cardiac electronic implantable devices: economic perspectives and impact of the TYRX™ antibacterial envelope

The occurrence of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) infections and related adverse outcomes have an important financial impact on the healthcare system, with hospitalization length of stay (2-3 weeks on average) being the largest cost driver, including the cost of device system extraction and device replacement accounting for more than half of total costs. In the recent literature, the economic profile of the TYRX™ absorbable antibacterial envelope was analysed taking into account both randomized and non-randomized trial data. Economic analysis found that the envelope is associated with cost-effectiveness ratios below USA and European benchmarks in selected patients at increased risk of infection. Therefore, the TYRX™ envelope, by effectively reducing CIED infections, provides value according to the criteria of affordability currently adopted by USA and European healthcare systems.

Nanotechnology applications for cardiovascular disease treatment: Current and future perspectives

A large majority of cardiovascular nanomedicine research has focused on fabricating designer nanoparticles for improved targeting as a means to overcome biological barriers. For cardiac related disorders, such as atherosclerosis, hypertension, and myocardial infarction, designer micro or nanoparticles are often administered into the vasculature or targeted vessel with the hope to circumvent problems associated with conventional drug delivery, including negative systemic side effects. Additionally, novel nano-drug carriers that enter circulation can be selectively uptaken by immune cells with the intended purpose that they modulate inflammatory processes and migrate locally to plaque for therapeutic payload delivery. Indeed, innovative design in nanoparticle composition, formulation, and functionalization has advanced the field as a means to achieve therapeutic efficacy for a variety of cardiac disease indications. This perspective aims to discuss these advances and provide new interpretations of how nanotechnology can be best applied to aid in cardiovascular disease treatment. In an effort to spark discussions on where the field of research should go, we share our outlook in new areas of nanotechnological inclusion and integration, such as in vascular, implantable, or wearable device technologies as well as nanocomposites and nanocoatings. Further, as cardiovascular diseases (CVD) increasingly claim a number of lives globally, we propose more attention should be placed by researchers on nanotechnological approaches for risk factor treatment to aid in early prevention and treatment of CVD.

Assessment of cardiac implantable electric device lead perforation using a metal artifact reduction algorithm in cardiac computed tomography

PURPOSE

CT is considered the non-invasive gold standard for evaluating cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) lead perforation, but metal artifacts caused by the lead tip affect the image quality and make a definitive diagnosis challenging. We compared the performances of the metal artifact reduction (MAR) algorithm and the conventional algorithm for identification of the right ventricular (RV) lead tip position in cardiac CT studies of patients with CIEDs.

METHOD

Forty-seven consecutive patients (26 men; age 70.3 ± 15.4 years) with CIEDs underwent cardiac CT. Using the conventional and MAR algorithm, two image reconstructions were performed for each scan. We calculated the artifact index (AI) to assess the quantitative capability of the MAR algorithm for artifact reduction and visually assessed the RV lead tip position on both images as follows: non-perforation, perforation, and equivocal.

RESULTS

The mean AIs were significantly lower with the MAR algorithm than with the conventional algorithm (96.7 ± 40.1 HU vs. 284.6 ± 134.1 HU, P < 0.001). Thirteen (27.7 %) patients were diagnosed as equivocal using the conventional algorithm but were diagnosed with perforation (2 patients) and non-perforation (11 patients) using the MAR algorithm (equivocal rate: 27.7 % vs. 0%, P < 0.001). Using the MAR algorithm, all cases were diagnosed with perforation (6 patients, 12.8 %) or non-perforation (41 patients, 87.2 %).

CONCLUSIONS

The MAR algorithm effectively reduced metal artifacts and allowed us to diagnose the presence or absence of perforation in all cases, whereas definitive diagnosis was difficult with the use of conventional algorithm in 27.7 % of cases.

Cost-Effectiveness of an Antibacterial Envelope for Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Infection Prevention in the US Healthcare System From the WRAP-IT Trial

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

In the WRAP-IT trial (Worldwide Randomized Antibiotic Envelope Infection Prevention), adjunctive use of an absorbable antibacterial envelope resulted in a 40% reduction of major cardiac implantable electronic device infection without increased risk of complication in 6983 patients undergoing cardiac implantable electronic device revision, replacement, upgrade, or initial cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator implant. There is limited information on the cost-effectiveness of this strategy. As a prespecified objective, we evaluated antibacterial envelope cost-effectiveness compared with standard-of-care infection prevention strategies in the US healthcare system.