水泡评分:用于预测心脏植入式电子设备感染的新型外部验证工具及其对抗菌包膜使用的成本效益影响。

IF 9.1 1区 医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Edd Maclean, Karishma Mahtani, Shohreh Honarbakhsh, Charles Butcher, Nikhil Ahluwalia, Adam S C Dennis, Antonio Creta, Malcolm Finlay, Mark Elliott, Vishal Mehta, Nadeev Wijesuriya, Omar Shaikh, Yom Zaw, Chizute Ogbedeh, Vasu Gautam, Pier D Lambiase, Richard J Schilling, Mark J Earley, Philip Moore, Amal Muthumala, Simon C E Sporton, Ross J Hunter, Christopher A Rinaldi, Jonathan Behar, Claire Martin, Christopher Monkhouse, Anthony Chow
{"title":"水泡评分:用于预测心脏植入式电子设备感染的新型外部验证工具及其对抗菌包膜使用的成本效益影响。","authors":"Edd Maclean, Karishma Mahtani, Shohreh Honarbakhsh, Charles Butcher, Nikhil Ahluwalia, Adam S C Dennis, Antonio Creta, Malcolm Finlay, Mark Elliott, Vishal Mehta, Nadeev Wijesuriya, Omar Shaikh, Yom Zaw, Chizute Ogbedeh, Vasu Gautam, Pier D Lambiase, Richard J Schilling, Mark J Earley, Philip Moore, Amal Muthumala, Simon C E Sporton, Ross J Hunter, Christopher A Rinaldi, Jonathan Behar, Claire Martin, Christopher Monkhouse, Anthony Chow","doi":"10.1161/CIRCEP.123.012446","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Antimicrobial envelopes reduce the incidence of cardiac implantable electronic device infections, but their cost restricts routine use in the United Kingdom. Risk scoring could help to identify which patients would most benefit from this technology.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A novel risk score (BLISTER [Blood results, Long procedure time, Immunosuppressed, Sixty years old (or younger), Type of procedure, Early re-intervention, Repeat procedure]) was derived from multivariate analysis of factors associated with cardiac implantable electronic device infection. Diagnostic utility was assessed against the existing PADIT score (Prior procedure, Age, Depressed renal function, Immunocompromised, Type of procedure) in both standard and high-risk external validation cohorts, and cost-utility models examined different BLISTER and PADIT score thresholds for TYRX (Medtronic; Minneapolis, MN) antimicrobial envelope allocation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In a derivation cohort (n=7383), cardiac implantable electronic device infection occurred in 59 individuals within 12 months of a procedure (event rate, 0.8%). In addition to the PADIT score constituents, lead extraction (hazard ratio, 3.3 [95% CI, 1.9-6.1]; <i>P</i><0.0001), C-reactive protein >50 mg/L (hazard ratio, 3.0 [95% CI, 1.4-6.4]; <i>P</i>=0.005), reintervention within 2 years (hazard ratio, 10.1 [95% CI, 5.6-17.9]; <i>P</i><0.0001), and top-quartile procedure duration (hazard ratio, 2.6 [95% CI, 1.6-4.1]; <i>P</i>=0.001) were independent predictors of infection. The BLISTER score demonstrated superior discriminative performance versus PADIT in the standard risk (n=2854, event rate: 0.8%, area under the curve, 0.82 versus 0.71; <i>P</i>=0.001) and high-risk validation cohorts (n=1961, event rate: 2.0%, area under the curve, 0.77 versus 0.69; <i>P</i>=0.001), and in all patients (n=12 198, event rate: 1%, area under the curve, 0.8 versus 0.75, <i>P</i>=0.002). In decision-analytic modeling, the optimum scenario assigned antimicrobial envelopes to patients with BLISTER scores ≥6 (10.8%), delivering a significant reduction in infections (relative risk reduction, 30%; <i>P</i>=0.036) within the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence cost-utility thresholds (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, £18 446).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The BLISTER score (https://qxmd.com/calculate/calculator_876/the-blister-score-for-cied-infection) was a valid predictor of cardiac implantable electronic device infection, and could facilitate cost-effective antimicrobial envelope allocation to high-risk patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":10319,"journal":{"name":"Circulation. Arrhythmia and electrophysiology","volume":" ","pages":"e012446"},"PeriodicalIF":9.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10949977/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The BLISTER Score: A Novel, Externally Validated Tool for Predicting Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Infections, and Its Cost-Utility Implications for Antimicrobial Envelope Use.\",\"authors\":\"Edd Maclean, Karishma Mahtani, Shohreh Honarbakhsh, Charles Butcher, Nikhil Ahluwalia, Adam S C Dennis, Antonio Creta, Malcolm Finlay, Mark Elliott, Vishal Mehta, Nadeev Wijesuriya, Omar Shaikh, Yom Zaw, Chizute Ogbedeh, Vasu Gautam, Pier D Lambiase, Richard J Schilling, Mark J Earley, Philip Moore, Amal Muthumala, Simon C E Sporton, Ross J Hunter, Christopher A Rinaldi, Jonathan Behar, Claire Martin, Christopher Monkhouse, Anthony Chow\",\"doi\":\"10.1161/CIRCEP.123.012446\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Antimicrobial envelopes reduce the incidence of cardiac implantable electronic device infections, but their cost restricts routine use in the United Kingdom. Risk scoring could help to identify which patients would most benefit from this technology.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A novel risk score (BLISTER [Blood results, Long procedure time, Immunosuppressed, Sixty years old (or younger), Type of procedure, Early re-intervention, Repeat procedure]) was derived from multivariate analysis of factors associated with cardiac implantable electronic device infection. Diagnostic utility was assessed against the existing PADIT score (Prior procedure, Age, Depressed renal function, Immunocompromised, Type of procedure) in both standard and high-risk external validation cohorts, and cost-utility models examined different BLISTER and PADIT score thresholds for TYRX (Medtronic; Minneapolis, MN) antimicrobial envelope allocation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In a derivation cohort (n=7383), cardiac implantable electronic device infection occurred in 59 individuals within 12 months of a procedure (event rate, 0.8%). In addition to the PADIT score constituents, lead extraction (hazard ratio, 3.3 [95% CI, 1.9-6.1]; <i>P</i><0.0001), C-reactive protein >50 mg/L (hazard ratio, 3.0 [95% CI, 1.4-6.4]; <i>P</i>=0.005), reintervention within 2 years (hazard ratio, 10.1 [95% CI, 5.6-17.9]; <i>P</i><0.0001), and top-quartile procedure duration (hazard ratio, 2.6 [95% CI, 1.6-4.1]; <i>P</i>=0.001) were independent predictors of infection. The BLISTER score demonstrated superior discriminative performance versus PADIT in the standard risk (n=2854, event rate: 0.8%, area under the curve, 0.82 versus 0.71; <i>P</i>=0.001) and high-risk validation cohorts (n=1961, event rate: 2.0%, area under the curve, 0.77 versus 0.69; <i>P</i>=0.001), and in all patients (n=12 198, event rate: 1%, area under the curve, 0.8 versus 0.75, <i>P</i>=0.002). In decision-analytic modeling, the optimum scenario assigned antimicrobial envelopes to patients with BLISTER scores ≥6 (10.8%), delivering a significant reduction in infections (relative risk reduction, 30%; <i>P</i>=0.036) within the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence cost-utility thresholds (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, £18 446).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The BLISTER score (https://qxmd.com/calculate/calculator_876/the-blister-score-for-cied-infection) was a valid predictor of cardiac implantable electronic device infection, and could facilitate cost-effective antimicrobial envelope allocation to high-risk patients.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10319,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Circulation. Arrhythmia and electrophysiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"e012446\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":9.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10949977/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Circulation. Arrhythmia and electrophysiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCEP.123.012446\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/22 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Circulation. Arrhythmia and electrophysiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCEP.123.012446","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:抗菌包膜可降低心脏植入式电子设备(CIED)感染的发生率,但其成本限制了其在英国的常规使用。风险评分有助于确定哪些患者最受益于这项技术。方法:通过对与 CIED 感染相关的因素进行多变量分析,得出一个新的风险评分(BLISTER)。在标准和高风险外部验证队列中,对照现有的 PADIT 评分对诊断效用进行了评估,成本效用模型检查了 TYRXTM 抗菌包膜 (AE) 分配的不同 BLISTER 和 PADIT 评分阈值。结果:在衍生队列(人数=7383)中,59 人在手术后 12 个月内发生了 CIED 感染(事件发生率:0.8%)。除 PADIT 评分构成因素外,铅抽取(HR 3.3 (1.9-6.1),p50mg/l(HR 3.0 (1.4-6.4),p=0.005),两年内再次干预(HR 10.1 (5.6-17.9),p结论:BLISTER评分(https://qxmd.com/calculate/calculator_876/the-blister-score-for-cied-infection)是预测CIED感染的有效指标,有助于对高风险患者进行具有成本效益的AE分配。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The BLISTER Score: A Novel, Externally Validated Tool for Predicting Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Infections, and Its Cost-Utility Implications for Antimicrobial Envelope Use.

Background: Antimicrobial envelopes reduce the incidence of cardiac implantable electronic device infections, but their cost restricts routine use in the United Kingdom. Risk scoring could help to identify which patients would most benefit from this technology.

Methods: A novel risk score (BLISTER [Blood results, Long procedure time, Immunosuppressed, Sixty years old (or younger), Type of procedure, Early re-intervention, Repeat procedure]) was derived from multivariate analysis of factors associated with cardiac implantable electronic device infection. Diagnostic utility was assessed against the existing PADIT score (Prior procedure, Age, Depressed renal function, Immunocompromised, Type of procedure) in both standard and high-risk external validation cohorts, and cost-utility models examined different BLISTER and PADIT score thresholds for TYRX (Medtronic; Minneapolis, MN) antimicrobial envelope allocation.

Results: In a derivation cohort (n=7383), cardiac implantable electronic device infection occurred in 59 individuals within 12 months of a procedure (event rate, 0.8%). In addition to the PADIT score constituents, lead extraction (hazard ratio, 3.3 [95% CI, 1.9-6.1]; P<0.0001), C-reactive protein >50 mg/L (hazard ratio, 3.0 [95% CI, 1.4-6.4]; P=0.005), reintervention within 2 years (hazard ratio, 10.1 [95% CI, 5.6-17.9]; P<0.0001), and top-quartile procedure duration (hazard ratio, 2.6 [95% CI, 1.6-4.1]; P=0.001) were independent predictors of infection. The BLISTER score demonstrated superior discriminative performance versus PADIT in the standard risk (n=2854, event rate: 0.8%, area under the curve, 0.82 versus 0.71; P=0.001) and high-risk validation cohorts (n=1961, event rate: 2.0%, area under the curve, 0.77 versus 0.69; P=0.001), and in all patients (n=12 198, event rate: 1%, area under the curve, 0.8 versus 0.75, P=0.002). In decision-analytic modeling, the optimum scenario assigned antimicrobial envelopes to patients with BLISTER scores ≥6 (10.8%), delivering a significant reduction in infections (relative risk reduction, 30%; P=0.036) within the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence cost-utility thresholds (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, £18 446).

Conclusions: The BLISTER score (https://qxmd.com/calculate/calculator_876/the-blister-score-for-cied-infection) was a valid predictor of cardiac implantable electronic device infection, and could facilitate cost-effective antimicrobial envelope allocation to high-risk patients.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
13.70
自引率
4.80%
发文量
187
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Circulation: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology is a journal dedicated to the study and application of clinical cardiac electrophysiology. It covers a wide range of topics including the diagnosis and treatment of cardiac arrhythmias, as well as research in this field. The journal accepts various types of studies, including observational research, clinical trials, epidemiological studies, and advancements in translational research.
×
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