Literature DB >> 30883056

Antibacterial Envelope to Prevent Cardiac Implantable Device Infection.

Khaldoun G Tarakji1, Suneet Mittal1, Charles Kennergren1, Ralph Corey1, Jeanne E Poole1, Edward Schloss1, Jose Gallastegui1, Robert A Pickett1, Rudolph Evonich1, François Philippon1, Janet M McComb1, Steven F Roark1, Denise Sorrentino1, Darius Sholevar1, Edmond Cronin1, Brett Berman1, David Riggio1, Mauro Biffi1, Hafiza Khan1, Marc T Silver1, Jack Collier1, Zayd Eldadah1, David J Wright1, Jeff D Lande1, Daniel R Lexcen1, Alan Cheng1, Bruce L Wilkoff1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Infections after placement of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) are associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. There is limited evidence on prophylactic strategies, other than the use of preoperative antibiotics, to prevent such infections.
METHODS: We conducted a randomized, controlled clinical trial to assess the safety and efficacy of an absorbable, antibiotic-eluting envelope in reducing the incidence of infection associated with CIED implantations. Patients who were undergoing a CIED pocket revision, generator replacement, or system upgrade or an initial implantation of a cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator were randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive the envelope or not. Standard-of-care strategies to prevent infection were used in all patients. The primary end point was infection resulting in system extraction or revision, long-term antibiotic therapy with infection recurrence, or death, within 12 months after the CIED implantation procedure. The secondary end point for safety was procedure-related or system-related complications within 12 months.
RESULTS: A total of 6983 patients underwent randomization: 3495 to the envelope group and 3488 to the control group. The primary end point occurred in 25 patients in the envelope group and 42 patients in the control group (12-month Kaplan-Meier estimated event rate, 0.7% and 1.2%, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36 to 0.98; P = 0.04). The safety end point occurred in 201 patients in the envelope group and 236 patients in the control group (12-month Kaplan-Meier estimated event rate, 6.0% and 6.9%, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.72 to 1.06; P<0.001 for noninferiority). The mean (±SD) duration of follow-up was 20.7±8.5 months. Major CIED-related infections through the entire follow-up period occurred in 32 patients in the envelope group and 51 patients in the control group (hazard ratio, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.98).
CONCLUSIONS: Adjunctive use of an antibacterial envelope resulted in a significantly lower incidence of major CIED infections than standard-of-care infection-prevention strategies alone, without a higher incidence of complications. (Funded by Medtronic; WRAP-IT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02277990.).
Copyright © 2019 Massachusetts Medical Society.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30883056     DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1901111

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  N Engl J Med        ISSN: 0028-4793            Impact factor:   91.245


  45 in total

Review 1.  Highlights from the 2019 American College of Cardiology Scientific Sessions in New Orleans, LA.

Authors:  Dylan L Steen
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  2019-07       Impact factor: 2.300

2.  Real-world effectiveness of infection prevention interventions for reducing procedure-related cardiac device infections: Insights from the veterans affairs clinical assessment reporting and tracking program.

Authors:  Archana Asundi; Maggie Stanislawski; Payal Mehta; Anna E Baron; Hillary J Mull; P Michael Ho; Peter J Zimetbaum; Kalpana Gupta; Westyn Branch-Elliman
Journal:  Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol       Date:  2019-06-04       Impact factor: 3.254

Review 3.  [ESC guidelines 2021 on cardiac pacing and cardiac resynchronization therapy : What's new?]

Authors:  Julia Vogler; Ahmad Keelani; Anna Traub; Roland Richard Tilz
Journal:  Herz       Date:  2022-01-10       Impact factor: 1.443

4.  Pushing the envelope to prevent CIED infection.

Authors:  Isobel Leake
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2019-06       Impact factor: 32.419

5.  Prevention of cardiac implantable electronic device infections: guidelines and conventional prophylaxis.

Authors:  Carina Blomstrom-Lundqvist; Bozena Ostrowska
Journal:  Europace       Date:  2021-05-25       Impact factor: 5.214

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

Authors:  Hui-Chen Han; Nathaniel M Hawkins; Charles M Pearman; David H Birnie; Andrew D Krahn
Journal:  Europace       Date:  2021-06-23       Impact factor: 5.214

Review 7.  Technology of deep brain stimulation: current status and future directions.

Authors:  Joachim K Krauss; Nir Lipsman; Tipu Aziz; Alexandre Boutet; Peter Brown; Jin Woo Chang; Benjamin Davidson; Warren M Grill; Marwan I Hariz; Andreas Horn; Michael Schulder; Antonios Mammis; Peter A Tass; Jens Volkmann; Andres M Lozano
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurol       Date:  2020-11-26       Impact factor: 42.937

8.  Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Infections; Long-Term Outcome after Extraction and Antibiotic Treatment.

Authors:  Jonas Hörnsten; Louise Axelsson; Katarina Westling
Journal:  Infect Dis Rep       Date:  2021-07-06

9.  Anti-biofilm activity of antibiotic-loaded Hylomate®.

Authors:  Mariana Albano; Kerryl E Greenwood-Quaintance; Melissa J Karau; Jayawant N Mandrekar; Robin Patel
Journal:  Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc       Date:  2021-06-08

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

Authors:  Jakrin Kewcharoen; Chanavuth Kanitsoraphan; Sittinun Thangjui; Thiratest Leesutipornchai; Sakditad Saowapa; Apichai Pokawattana; Leenhapong Navaravong
Journal:  J Arrhythm       Date:  2021-03-13
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.