Literature DB >> 33457133

Erosion of Cardiovascular Implantable Device: Conservative Therapy or Extraction?

Randa N Tabbah1, Bernard Abi-Saleh2.   

Abstract

The standard of care for device infection is normally a complete removal of the implantable system, including lead extraction in local or systemic infection cases. Despite the importance of lead extraction techniques, these techniques are complex and have some major risks. Success rates were high, but they are less favorable in patients with several comorbidities. An 80-year-old male presented for device erosion. The patient is known to have several cardiac comorbidities: a transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), mitral clips for severe aortic stenosis, mitral regurgitation, dual-chamber implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD) for secondary prevention. Several weeks ago, he noted tenderness and redness at the site of his device pocket, and his physician, after checking his wound, suggested a possible skin irritation with no systemic infection and started antibiotics treatment. Two weeks later, he noted thinning of the skin around the device with a hematoma and ecchymosis, and slight skin erosion. Strategies for assessment of the wound and pocket cleaning were taken. The strategy was to remove the left-sided device and keep the leads since the patient lately has no elevated inflammatory labs, negative cultures, no fever, nor signs of vegetation on transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) and refused any additional examination as positron emission tomography (PET) scan, and reimplant a new system on the contralateral side. The procedure was divided into two sequences: extracting the device and after one-week implantation of a right-sided new system. In this case, chronic antibiotics were discussable to decrease the recurrence rate, but they did increase the severity of the patient's thrombocytopenia. Despite extraction being the gold standard of treatment in most cases of devices with local and systemic infection, there are some frail patients with several comorbidities where extraction is unbearable due to its major risks and complex procedure. In these specific cases with local infection and device erosion with no signs of any systemic infection, conservative therapy could be a viable option.
Copyright © 2020, Tabbah et al.

Entities:  

Keywords:  antibiotics; conservative therapy; erosion; extraction; pocket infection

Year:  2020        PMID: 33457133      PMCID: PMC7797431          DOI: 10.7759/cureus.12032

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cureus        ISSN: 2168-8184


  18 in total

1.  Successful management of an infected implantable cardioverter defibrillator with oral antibiotics and without removal of the device.

Authors:  V Turkisher; I Priel; M Dan
Journal:  Pacing Clin Electrophysiol       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 1.976

Review 2.  Transvenous Lead Extractions: Current Approaches and Future Trends.

Authors:  Adryan A Perez; Frank W Woo; Darren C Tsang; Roger G Carrillo
Journal:  Arrhythm Electrophysiol Rev       Date:  2018-08

3.  Conservative treatment of pacemaker pocket infection: is it a viable option?

Authors:  Michael Glikson
Journal:  Europace       Date:  2012-11-23       Impact factor: 5.214

4.  Infected permanent cardiac pacemaker. Management without removal.

Authors:  R W Furman; A J Hiller; R H Playforth; L R Bryant; J K Trinkle
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  1972-07       Impact factor: 4.330

Review 5.  2017 HRS expert consensus statement on cardiovascular implantable electronic device lead management and extraction.

Authors:  Fred M Kusumoto; Mark H Schoenfeld; Bruce L Wilkoff; Charles I Berul; Ulrika M Birgersdotter-Green; Roger Carrillo; Yong-Mei Cha; Jude Clancy; Jean-Claude Deharo; Kenneth A Ellenbogen; Derek Exner; Ayman A Hussein; Charles Kennergren; Andrew Krahn; Richard Lee; Charles J Love; Ruth A Madden; Hector Alfredo Mazzetti; JoEllyn Carol Moore; Jeffrey Parsonnet; Kristen K Patton; Marc A Rozner; Kimberly A Selzman; Morio Shoda; Komandoor Srivathsan; Neil F Strathmore; Charles D Swerdlow; Christine Tompkins; Oussama Wazni
Journal:  Heart Rhythm       Date:  2017-09-15       Impact factor: 6.343

6.  Comparison of outcomes in patients with abandoned versus extracted implantable cardioverter defibrillator leads.

Authors:  Mathieu Amelot; Anthony Foucault; Patrice Scanu; Sophie Gomes; Laure Champ-Rigot; Arnaud Pellissier; Paul Milliez
Journal:  Arch Cardiovasc Dis       Date:  2011-10-28       Impact factor: 2.340

7.  Vacuum-assisted wound closure for pacemaker infection.

Authors:  Takuma Satsu; Masahiko Onoe
Journal:  Pacing Clin Electrophysiol       Date:  2009-12-16       Impact factor: 1.976

8.  Predictors of short-term complications after implantable cardioverter-defibrillator replacement: results from the Ontario ICD Database.

Authors:  Andrew D Krahn; Douglas S Lee; David Birnie; Jeffrey S Healey; Eugene Crystal; Paul Dorian; Christopher S Simpson; Yaariv Khaykin; Douglas Cameron; Amir Janmohamed; Raymond Yee; Peter C Austin; Zhongliang Chen; Judy Hardy; Jack V Tu
Journal:  Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol       Date:  2011-02-15

9.  Surgical lead-preserving procedures for pacemaker pocket infection.

Authors:  Makoto Yamada; Susumu Takeuchi; Yasuhiro Shiojiri; Kazuto Maruta; Atsuyoshi Oki; Katsuyoshi Iyano; Toshihiro Takaba
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 4.330

Review 10.  Conservative therapy for the management of cardiac implantable electronic device infection.

Authors:  Yukio Sekiguchi
Journal:  J Arrhythm       Date:  2015-11-19
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.