Long-term incidence of infective endocarditis according to the type of cardiac implantable electronic device: a nationwide comparison with moderate- and high-risk patient groups.

IF 10.2 1区 医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Europace Pub Date : 2026-10-01 DOI:10.1093/europace/euag232
Amna Alhakak, Lauge Østergaard, Mohammed Bakir Ahmad Lafta, Michael Vinther, Berit Thornvig Philbert, Henning Bundgaard, Lars Køber, Emil Loldrup Fosbøl
{"title":"Long-term incidence of infective endocarditis according to the type of cardiac implantable electronic device: a nationwide comparison with moderate- and high-risk patient groups.","authors":"Amna Alhakak, Lauge Østergaard, Mohammed Bakir Ahmad Lafta, Michael Vinther, Berit Thornvig Philbert, Henning Bundgaard, Lars Køber, Emil Loldrup Fosbøl","doi":"10.1093/europace/euag232","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>According to the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines, patients with a cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) are considered at moderate risk of infective endocarditis (IE), irrespective of CIED type. However, comparative data across CIED types and IE risk groups are limited. We examined IE rates according to CIED type compared with moderate- and high-risk groups.</p><p><strong>Methods and results: </strong>Danish nationwide registries were used to identify patients with first-time CIED implantation and reference populations at moderate and high risk of IE (2000-2022), based on the ESC guidelines. The high-risk group included patients with a left-sided prosthetic valve. Patients with prior IE or left-sided prosthetic valve were excluded from the CIED group. The primary outcome was incident IE within 10 years. The study included 84 171 CIED recipients, 127 966 moderate-risk patients, and 23 505 high-risk patients. Pacemakers were the most common CIED type (74.9%), followed by implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (16.6%), cardiac resynchronization therapy device with defibrillator (CRT-D) (4.6%), and cardiac resynchronization therapy device without defibrillator (3.9%). Pacemaker recipients were the oldest (median 78.2 years) and most frail. The 10-year cumulative incidence of IE was lowest in pacemaker recipients (1.0% [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.9-1.1]) and highest in CRT-D recipients (2.2% [95% CI: 1.7-2.9]). In adjusted analyses, all CIED types were associated with higher IE rates than the moderate-risk group but lower than the high-risk group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this nationwide cohort, IE risk differed across CIED types, highest in CRT-D and lowest in pacemaker recipients. All CIED types were associated with higher risk than moderate-risk patients but lower risk than high-risk patients, supporting the ESC classification. Cardiac resynchronization therapy device with defibrillator recipients may warrant further evaluation of preventive strategies.</p>","PeriodicalId":11981,"journal":{"name":"Europace","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13659775/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Europace","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/europace/euag232","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aims: According to the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines, patients with a cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) are considered at moderate risk of infective endocarditis (IE), irrespective of CIED type. However, comparative data across CIED types and IE risk groups are limited. We examined IE rates according to CIED type compared with moderate- and high-risk groups.

Methods and results: Danish nationwide registries were used to identify patients with first-time CIED implantation and reference populations at moderate and high risk of IE (2000-2022), based on the ESC guidelines. The high-risk group included patients with a left-sided prosthetic valve. Patients with prior IE or left-sided prosthetic valve were excluded from the CIED group. The primary outcome was incident IE within 10 years. The study included 84 171 CIED recipients, 127 966 moderate-risk patients, and 23 505 high-risk patients. Pacemakers were the most common CIED type (74.9%), followed by implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (16.6%), cardiac resynchronization therapy device with defibrillator (CRT-D) (4.6%), and cardiac resynchronization therapy device without defibrillator (3.9%). Pacemaker recipients were the oldest (median 78.2 years) and most frail. The 10-year cumulative incidence of IE was lowest in pacemaker recipients (1.0% [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.9-1.1]) and highest in CRT-D recipients (2.2% [95% CI: 1.7-2.9]). In adjusted analyses, all CIED types were associated with higher IE rates than the moderate-risk group but lower than the high-risk group.

Conclusion: In this nationwide cohort, IE risk differed across CIED types, highest in CRT-D and lowest in pacemaker recipients. All CIED types were associated with higher risk than moderate-risk patients but lower risk than high-risk patients, supporting the ESC classification. Cardiac resynchronization therapy device with defibrillator recipients may warrant further evaluation of preventive strategies.

根据心脏植入式电子装置类型的感染性心内膜炎长期发病率:全国中高危患者组比较
背景和目的:根据ESC指南,植入心脏植入式电子装置(CIED)的患者被认为具有中度感染性心内膜炎(IE)风险,无论CIED类型如何。然而,跨CIED类型和IE风险组的比较数据有限。我们根据CIED类型比较了中等和高危组的IE发生率。方法:根据ESC指南,使用丹麦全国登记系统识别首次植入CIED的患者和IE中度和高风险(2000-2022)的参考人群。高危组包括左侧人工瓣膜患者。既往有IE或左侧人工瓣膜的患者被排除在CIED组之外。主要结局为10年内的IE事件。结果:该研究包括84,171名CIED患者,127,966名中危患者和23,505名高危患者。起搏器是最常见的CIED类型(74.9%),其次是ICD(16.6%)、CRT-D(4.6%)和CRT-P(3.9%)。接受心脏起搏器治疗的患者年龄最大(中位年龄78.2岁),身体最虚弱。10年IE累积发生率在起搏器接受者中最低(1.0% [95% CI:0.9-1.1]),在CRT-D接受者中最高(2.2% [95% CI:1.7-2.9])。在调整分析中,所有CIED类型与中等风险组的IE发生率相关,但低于高风险组。结论:在这个全国性队列中,不同类型CIED的IE风险不同,接受ct - d治疗的IE风险最高,接受起搏器治疗的IE风险最低。所有CIED类型的风险均高于中危患者,但低于高危患者,支持ESC分类。ct - d接受者可能需要进一步评估预防策略。
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
Europace
Europace 医学-心血管系统
CiteScore
10.30
自引率
8.20%
发文量
851
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: EP - Europace - European Journal of Pacing, Arrhythmias and Cardiac Electrophysiology of the European Heart Rhythm Association of the European Society of Cardiology. The journal aims to provide an avenue of communication of top quality European and international original scientific work and reviews in the fields of Arrhythmias, Pacing and Cellular Electrophysiology. The Journal offers the reader a collection of contemporary original peer-reviewed papers, invited papers and editorial comments together with book reviews and correspondence.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书