The effect of an antibacterial envelope on cardiac implantable device-related infection - A real-world analysis from a tertiary center.

Nadine Molitor, Vera Graup, Daniel Hofer, Pascal Rüegg, Deniza Avdi, Ardan M Saguner, Alexander Breitenstein, Jan Steffel
{"title":"The effect of an antibacterial envelope on cardiac implantable device-related infection - A real-world analysis from a tertiary center.","authors":"Nadine Molitor, Vera Graup, Daniel Hofer, Pascal Rüegg, Deniza Avdi, Ardan M Saguner, Alexander Breitenstein, Jan Steffel","doi":"10.5603/cj.100458","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Infections related to cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Antibiotic-eluting envelopes have been introduced as a technology to prevent CIED infections. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the antibacterial envelope in the real-world population of a tertiary center.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This cohort study includes consecutively enrolled patients undergoing a device procedure from 01/2014 to 12/2020 at the University Hospital in Zurich. During period A (01/2014-12/2019) antibacterial envelopes were not used, whereas during period B (01/2020-12/2020) antibacterial envelopes were used in all device interventions. Follow-up was conducted by assessing all available patient records from patient visits and hospitalization.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>1757 patients (male 70.5%, mean age 67.1 ± 16 years), were analyzed during a follow-up of 24 months. In 302 patients (17.2%) an antibacterial envelope was used. The overall occurrence of a device infection was low (n = 15, 0.85%). Factors that were associated with the incidence of an infection were not undergoing a primary implantation procedure (p = 0.024) and a CRT-P/D intervention (p = 0.022). There was no difference in the rate of infection between patients in whom a bacterial envelope was implanted vs. those in whom it was not used (0.6 vs. 0.9%, p = 0.693).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In a contemporary cohort of consecutive, unselected patients undergoing a device intervention at a large tertiary care center, the rate of device infection was low and not significantly different with vs. without the use of an antibacterial envelope. The data have important practical as well as economic implications for physicians performing such procedures.</p>","PeriodicalId":93923,"journal":{"name":"Cardiology journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cardiology journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5603/cj.100458","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Infections related to cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Antibiotic-eluting envelopes have been introduced as a technology to prevent CIED infections. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the antibacterial envelope in the real-world population of a tertiary center.

Methods: This cohort study includes consecutively enrolled patients undergoing a device procedure from 01/2014 to 12/2020 at the University Hospital in Zurich. During period A (01/2014-12/2019) antibacterial envelopes were not used, whereas during period B (01/2020-12/2020) antibacterial envelopes were used in all device interventions. Follow-up was conducted by assessing all available patient records from patient visits and hospitalization.

Results: 1757 patients (male 70.5%, mean age 67.1 ± 16 years), were analyzed during a follow-up of 24 months. In 302 patients (17.2%) an antibacterial envelope was used. The overall occurrence of a device infection was low (n = 15, 0.85%). Factors that were associated with the incidence of an infection were not undergoing a primary implantation procedure (p = 0.024) and a CRT-P/D intervention (p = 0.022). There was no difference in the rate of infection between patients in whom a bacterial envelope was implanted vs. those in whom it was not used (0.6 vs. 0.9%, p = 0.693).

Conclusion: In a contemporary cohort of consecutive, unselected patients undergoing a device intervention at a large tertiary care center, the rate of device infection was low and not significantly different with vs. without the use of an antibacterial envelope. The data have important practical as well as economic implications for physicians performing such procedures.

抗菌包膜对心脏植入器械相关感染的影响--来自一家三级中心的实际情况分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信