| Literature DB >> 32247833 |
Mikhael F El-Chami1, Matt Bonner2, Reece Holbrook2, Kurt Stromberg2, Jane Mayotte2, Amy Molan2, M Rizwan Sohail3, Laurence M Epstein4.
Abstract
Pacemaker-related infections remain a constant concern due to increased risk of patient morbidity and mortality. Although transvenous pacemakers are expected to have an infection rate ranging from 0.77% to 2.08%, no cases of leadless pacemaker infection have been reported in clinical trials enrolling more than 3000 patients. Many potential reasons why leadless pacemakers may be resistant to infection include the absence of a subcutaneous pocket and leads, reduced skin and glove contact, size, location, and device material. This review summarizes the current state of evidence regarding the apparent infection resistance of leadless pacemakers.Entities:
Keywords: Cardiac implantable electronic device; Infection; Leadless pacemaker; Micra; Nanostim
Year: 2020 PMID: 32247833 DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2020.03.019
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Heart Rhythm ISSN: 1547-5271 Impact factor: 6.343