Literature DB >> 20456647

Recurrent implantable cardioverter-defibrillator replacement is associated with an increasing risk of pocket-related complications.

C Jan Willem Borleffs1, Joep Thijssen, Mihály K de Bie, Johannes B van Rees, Guido H van Welsenes, Lieselot van Erven, Jeroen J Bax, Suzanne C Cannegieter, Martin J Schalij.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Despite beneficial effects of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy, limited service life results in replacement within the majority of patients. Data concerning the effect of replacement procedures on the occurrence of pocket-related adverse events are scarce. In this study, the requirement for pocket-related surgical re-interventions following ICD treatment and the effect of device replacement were evaluated.
METHODS: From 1992 to 2008, 2,415 patients receiving an ICD at the Leiden University Medical Center were analyzed. Pocket-related complications requiring surgical re-intervention following ICD implantation or replacement were noted. Elective device replacement, lead failure, and device malfunction were not considered pocket-related complications.
RESULTS: A total of 3,161 ICDs were included in the analysis. In total, 145 surgical re-interventions were required in 122 (3.9%) ICDs implanted in 114 (4.7%) unique patients. Three-year cumulative incidence for first surgical re-intervention in all ICDs was 4.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 3.9-5.5%). Replacement ICDs exhibited a doubled requirement for surgical re-intervention (rate ratio 2.2, 95% CI 1.5-3.0). Compared to first implanted ICDs, the occurrence of surgical re-intervention in replacements was 2.5 (95% CI 1.6-3.7) times higher for infectious and 1.7 (95% CI 0.9-3.0) for noninfectious causes. Subdivision by the number of ICD replacements showed an increase in the annual risk for surgical re-intervention, ranging from 1.5% (95% CI 1.2-1.9%) for the first, to 8.1% (95% CI 1.7-18.3%) for the fourth implanted ICD.
CONCLUSIONS: ICD replacement is associated with a doubled risk for pocket-related surgical re-interventions. Furthermore, the need for re-intervention increases with every consecutive replacement.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20456647     DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.2010.02780.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pacing Clin Electrophysiol        ISSN: 0147-8389            Impact factor:   1.976


  17 in total

1.  A meta-analysis of antibacterial envelope use in prevention of cardiovascular implantable electronic device infection.

Authors:  Sajid Ali; Yousuf Kanjwal; Steven R Bruhl; Mohammed Alo; Mohammed Taleb; Syed S Ali; Ameer Kabour; Owais Khawaja
Journal:  Ther Adv Infect Dis       Date:  2017-05-01

2.  Repeated procedures at the generator pocket are a determinant of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator infection.

Authors:  Eduardo Arana-Rueda; Alonso Pedrote; Manuel Frutos-López; Juan Acosta; Beatriz Jauregui; Lorena García-Riesco; Álvaro Arce-León; Federico Gómez-Pulido; Juan A Sánchez-Brotons; Encarnación Gutiérrez-Carretero; Arístides de Alarcón-González
Journal:  Clin Cardiol       Date:  2017-06-21       Impact factor: 2.882

Review 3.  [Leadless endocardial ultrasound based left ventricular stimulation : WISE CRT System: alternative to conventional methods].

Authors:  C Butter; S Fehrendt; V Möller; M Seifert
Journal:  Herzschrittmacherther Elektrophysiol       Date:  2018-11-08

4.  Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Infection in Patients at Risk.

Authors:  Khaldoun G Tarakji; Christopher R Ellis; Pascal Defaye; Charles Kennergren
Journal:  Arrhythm Electrophysiol Rev       Date:  2016-05

5.  Risk factors associated with early- versus late-onset implantable cardioverter-defibrillator infections.

Authors:  Muhammad R Sohail; Salwa Hussain; Katherine Y Le; Chadi Dib; Christine M Lohse; Paul A Friedman; David L Hayes; Daniel Z Uslan; Walter R Wilson; James M Steckelberg; Larry M Baddour
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2011-03-02       Impact factor: 1.900

6.  Is ventricular sensing always right, when it is left?

Authors:  Mauro Biffi; Giulia de Zan; Giulia Massaro; Andrea Angeletti; Cristian Martignani; Giuseppe Boriani; Igor Diemberger; Matteo Ziacchi
Journal:  Clin Cardiol       Date:  2018-09-21       Impact factor: 2.882

7.  Predicting risk of endovascular device infection in patients with Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia (PREDICT-SAB).

Authors:  M Rizwan Sohail; Bharath Raj Palraj; Sana Khalid; Daniel Z Uslan; Farah Al-Saffar; Paul A Friedman; David L Hayes; Christine M Lohse; Walter R Wilson; James M Steckelberg; Larry M Baddour
Journal:  Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol       Date:  2014-12-12

8.  Cardiac implantable electronic device infections: facts, current practice, and the unanswered questions.

Authors:  Khaldoun G Tarakji; Bruce L Wilkoff
Journal:  Curr Infect Dis Rep       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 3.725

9.  Management of Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Devices Infections in High-Risk Patients.

Authors:  Charles Kennergren
Journal:  Arrhythm Electrophysiol Rev       Date:  2015-04-10

10.  Longevity of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in a single-center population.

Authors:  Joachim Seegers; Pascal Muñoz Expósito; Lars Lüthje; Thomas Fischer; Matthias Lueken; Hannes Wenk; Samuel T Sossalla; Gerd Hasenfuss; Markus Zabel
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2015-08-08       Impact factor: 1.900

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.