A meta-analysis of antibacterial envelope use in prevention of cardiovascular implantable electronic device infection

Physician antibiotic hydration preferences for biologic antibacterial envelopes during cardiac implantable device procedures

Background

Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infection is a potentially serious complication of CIED procedures. Infection risk mitigation includes using guideline-recommended pre-operative intravenous antibacterial prophylaxis (IV ABX). The use of antibiotic-eluting CIED envelopes has also been shown to reduce infection risk. The relationship between and potential benefits associated with guideline-recommended IV ABX in combination with antibacterial envelopes have not been characterized.

Methods

Biologic envelopes made from non-crosslinked extracellular matrix (ECM) were implanted into 1,102 patients receiving CIEDs. The implanting physician decided patient selection for using a biologic envelope and envelope hydration solution. Observational data was analyzed on IV ABX utilization rates, antibacterial envelope usage, and infection outcomes.

Results

Overall compliance with IV ABX was 96.6%, and most patients received a biologic envelope hydrated in antibiotics (77.1%). After a mean follow-up of 223 days, infection rates were higher for sites using IV ABX <80% of the time vs. sites using ≥80% (5.6% vs. 0.8%, p = 0.008). Physicians demonstrated preference for hydration solutions containing gentamicin in higher-risk patients, which was found by multivariate analysis to be associated with a threefold reduction in infection risk (OR 3.0, 95% CI, 1.0-10.0).

Conclusion

These findings suggest that use of antibiotics, particularly gentamicin, in biologic envelope hydration solution may reduce infection risk, and use of antibacterial envelopes without adjunct IV ABX may not be sufficient to reduce CIED infections.

Clinical trial registration

[https://clinicaltrials.gov/], identifier [NCT02530970].

Environmental, Microbiological, and Immunological Features of Bacterial Biofilms Associated with Implanted Medical Devices

The spread of biofilms on medical implants represents one of the principal triggers of persistent and chronic infections in clinical settings, and it has been the subject of many studies in the past few years, with most of them focused on prosthetic joint infections. We review here recent works on biofilm formation and microbial colonization on a large variety of indwelling devices, ranging from heart valves and pacemakers to urological and breast implants and from biliary stents and endoscopic tubes to contact lenses and neurosurgical implants. We focus on bacterial abundance and distribution across different devices and body sites and on the role of environmental features, such as the presence of fluid flow and properties of the implant surface, as well as on the interplay between bacterial colonization and the response of the human immune system.

Prevention of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device-Related Infection in Patients With Cancer: The Role of a Comprehensive Prophylactic Bundle Approach That Includes the Antimicrobial Mesh

Background

Oncological patients have several additional risk factors for developing a cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED)–related infection. Therefore, we evaluated the clinical impact of our comprehensive bundle approach that includes the novel minocycline and rifampin antimicrobial mesh (TYRX) for the prevention of CIED infections in patients living with cancer.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed all consecutive patients who had a CIED placement at our institution during 2012–2017 who received preoperative vancomycin, intraoperative pocket irrigation with bacitracin and polymyxin B, plus TYRX antimicrobial mesh, followed by postoperative oral minocycline.

Results

A total of 154 patients had a CIED, with 97 permanent pacemakers (PPMs), 23 implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs), and 34 cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices. An underlying solid cancer was present in 62% of patients, while 38% had a hematologic malignancy. Apart from a higher proportion of surgical interventions in the PPM group than in the ICD and CRT groups (P = .007), no other oncologic variables were statistically significantly different between groups. Despite an extensive median follow-up period (interquartile range) of 21.9 (6.7–33.8) months, 16 patients (10%) had a mechanical complication, while only 2 patients (1.3%) developed a CIED infection, requiring the device to be explanted.

Conclusions

Our comprehensive prophylactic bundle approach using TYRX antimicrobial mesh in an oncologic population at high risk for infections was revealed upon extensive follow-up to be both safe and effective in maintaining the rate of CIED infection at 1.3%, well within published averages in the broader population of CIED recipients.

Economic impact of cardiac implantable electronic device infections: cost analysis at one year in a large U.S. health insurer

Aims: Cardiac device infections (CDIs) are serious adverse events associated with morbidity and mortality, significant costs and increased healthcare utilization. The objective of the current study was to characterize the CDI rate by device type, risk factors for infection and healthcare costs from a large U.S. health insurer perspective.Materials and Methods: A retrospective analysis of a large U.S. health insurer database identified commercial and Medicare Advantage with Part D (MAPD) members ≥18 years with ≥1 claim for a cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) procedure between 01 October 2011 and 31 October 2015. CIEDs included pacemakers (IPG), implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs), and cardiac resynchronization therapy - pacemakers without (CRT-P) and with defibrillation (CRT-D). Probabilities of CDI through one-year post implant were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. A regression model with stepwise variable selection was used to select risk factors associated with CDIs.Results: A total of 63,406 patients were included with an overall CDI rate of 1.28% (1.0% de novo and 1.74% replacement devices), varying by device type: IPG = 0.91%; ICD = 1.63%; CRT-p = 1.50%; CRT-D = 2.22%. The average adjusted annual medical costs were 2.4 times greater [95% confidence interval (CI) = 2.1-2.7] for those with an infection compared to those without, and the incremental cost difference was estimated to be $57,322 [95% CI $46,572-$70,484]. Observed risk factors of CDIs included prior device infection [Odds ratio (OR) = 11.356; 95% CI = 7.923-16.276], undergoing a CIED replacement procedure (OR = 1.644; 95% CI = 1.361-1.987), implantation of a high-power device (OR = 1.354; 95% CI = 1.115-1.643), and younger age (age < 65) (OR = 1.607; 95% CI = 1.307-1.976).Conclusions: The CDI rate at one year ranged from 0.91%-2.22% depending on device type. Management of CDIs among commercial and MAPD members is associated with high healthcare expenditures.

Role of antibiotic envelopes in preventing cardiac implantable electronic device infection: A meta-analysis of 14 859 procedures

INTRODUCTION

We conducted an updated meta-analysis assessing the role of antibiotic envelopes in preventing Cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED)-related infections as compared to standard infection prevention strategies.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted on Medline/PubMed and EMBASE/Ovid database. We used Mantel-Haenszel method with fixed-effect model to compute risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). We also performed subgroup and trial sequential analysis on the data.

RESULTS

Antibiotic envelope reduced the risk of both all infections [RR: 0.41, CI: 0.31-0.54, P < .05, I 2 = 75%, χ 2 P < .05] and major infections [RR: 0.48, CI: 0.32-0.70, P < .05, I 2 = 60%, χ 2 P = .04].

CONCLUSION

Prophylactic use of antibiotic envelopes as an adjuvant therapy to standard infection prevention strategies, helps in reducing the risk of CIED infections.

The Diagnosis and Treatment of Pacemaker-Associated Infection

BACKGROUND

Approximately 105 000 cardiac electronic devices are newly implanted in Germany each year. Germany has the highest implantation rate with respect to population of any European country. Infections in cardiac implants are serious complications, with an associated in-hospital mortality of 5-15%. It is thus very important to optimize the diagnostic and therapeutic strategies by which such infections can be detected early and treated effectively.

METHODS

This review is based on pertinent publications retrieved by a search in PubMed, with special attention to the current recommendations of international medical specialty societies.

RESULTS

According to the international literature, the incidence of device-associated infection is 1.7% (in six months) for implanted defibrillators and 9.5% (in two years) for resynchronization devices. No absolute figures on infection rates are available for Germany. Infection can involve either the site where the impulse generator is implanted or the intravascular portion of the electrodes. The most important elements of the diagnostic evaluation are: assessment of the local findings; pathogen identification by culture of peripheral blood, swabs of the infected site, or material recovered at surgery; and transesophageal echocardiography to detect endocarditic deposits on the electrodes or cardiac valves. The treatment consists of appropriate antibiotic administration and the complete removal of all foreign material. These special extractions are generally performed via the transvenous route. With the aid of various sheath systems, the procedure can be carried out safely and effectively, with a success rate above 95% and a complication rate below 3%. The indications for the implantation of a new device after eradication of the infection should be critically reassessed.

CONCLUSION

Untreated infection carries a high mortality. Evaluation and treatment according to a standardized clinical algorithm facilitate correct and timely diagnosis and the choice of an appropriate therapeutic strategy.

Postoperative Antibiotic Prophylaxis Following Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Placement

Infections related to cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) placement are associated with poor clinical outcomes. As such, preprocedural prophylactic antibiotic therapy is indicated for all patients prior to device insertion. However, the available data are less clear on the impact of postprocedural antibiotic therapy on rates of CIED infection when used in addition to preprocedural therapy. This is single-center, retrospective cohort study of 913 patients who underwent CIED-related procedures between October 2010 and August 2014 sought to compare the rate of CIED infections in patients receiving only preprocedural antibiotics with those receiving both preprocedural and postprocedural antibiotics. Univariate analysis was used to detect independent risk factors for CIED infection. After excluding patients receiving concomitant antibiotics for other conditions, those undergoing CIED extraction alone, and those with a lack of follow-up data and/or adequate documentation of clinical encounters, 569 patients were identified for inclusion in the final analysis. The majority of patients who received postprocedural antibiotics received three to five days of therapy, with the most common antibiotic used being cephalexin. There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of infection between patients who did and did not receive postoperative antibiotics (4.5% versus 6.1%; p = 0.398). In a multivariate analysis, the use of postprocedural antibiotic therapy was not a significant risk factor for infection (adjusted odds ratio: 0.692; 95% confidence interval: 0.314–1.525; p = 0.361). It is therefore reasonable to withhold prescribing postoperative antibiotics in patients following CIED implantation. Individualized risk factor evaluation of patient comorbidities and procedural characteristics may be needed to aid in determining whether postoperative antibiotics are reasonable in different patients. The validity of these findings is contingent on further confirmation via a prospective, randomized clinical trial.

The never-ending story of CIED infection prevention: Shall we WRAP-IT and go?

CIED infection is perceived as substantial, ranging from 1% to 4% in literature depending on different studies and on the population profile, and can appear either as surgical site or endovascular infection or both. Several factors have been found to be associated to CIED infection, that can be summarized as patient-related (clinical profile, associated comorbidities, ongoing treatment as anticoagulants and immunosuppressants), Procedure-related (complexity of CIED surgery, type of surgery, previous pocket exploration), and center-/operator-related (center/operator volume). Thus, it is difficult to disentangle the extent of benefit that any intervention may offer to decrease this threatened complication, owing to its multifaceted complexity. The recently completed PADIT and WRAP-IT trials have significantly improved our knowledge in this field (nearly 20 000 patients enrolled), reporting an infection rate of 1% to 1.2% in control-arm patients and a 20% to 67% infection decrease when incremental antibiotic prophylaxis is added on top of optimized preventative strategies. Observational registries highlighted that participation in a prospective survey of CIED infection dramatically decrease infection rate by optimization of antisepsis protocols and operator awareness, that explains the low event rate observed in PADIT and WRAP-IT. While this consideration prompts each center to engage into a proactive infection prevention program, it makes a point in favor of antibiotic prophylaxis delivered locally in 7 days or more, as enabled by TYRX in the WRAP-IT trial. However, care sustainability (the number needed to treat in the most favorable WRAP-IT scenario is 100) suggests further analysis to understand the settings (patient- or procedure-related) most likely to benefit by such an enhanced prevention strategy.

Real-world effectiveness of infection prevention interventions for reducing procedure-related cardiac device infections: Insights from the veterans affairs clinical assessment reporting and tracking program

OBJECTIVE

To measure the association between receipt of specific infection prevention interventions and procedure-related cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infections.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort with manually reviewed infection status.

SETTING

Setting: National, multicenter Veterans Health Administration (VA) cohort.

PARTICIPANTS

Sampling of procedures entered into the VA Clinical Assessment Reporting and Tracking-Electrophysiology (CART-EP) database from fiscal years 2008 through 2015.

METHODS

A sample of procedures entered into the CART-EP database underwent manual review for occurrence of CIED infection and other clinical/procedural variables. The primary outcome was 6-month incidence of CIED infection. Measures of association were calculated using multivariable generalized estimating equations logistic regression.

RESULTS

We identified 101 procedure-related CIED infections among 2,098 procedures (4.8% of reviewed sample). Factors associated with increased odds of infections included (1) wound complications (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 8.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.16-24.20), (2) revisions including generator changes (aOR, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.59-3.63), (3) an elevated international normalized ratio (INR) &gt;1.5 (aOR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.12-2.18), and (4) methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus colonization (aOR, 9.56; 95% CI, 1.55-27.77). Clinically effective prevention interventions included preprocedural skin cleaning with chlorhexidine versus other topical agents (aOR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.22-0.76) and receipt of β-lactam antimicrobial prophylaxis versus vancomycin (aOR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.37-0.96). The use of mesh pockets and continuation of antimicrobial prophylaxis after skin closure were not associated with reduced infection risk.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings regarding the real-world clinical effectiveness of different prevention strategies can be applied to the development of evidence-based protocols and infection prevention guidelines specific to the electrophysiology laboratory.

Transvenous Lead Extractions: Current Approaches and Future Trends

The use of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) has continued to rise along with indications for their removal. When confronted with challenging clinical scenarios such as device infection, malfunction or vessel occlusion, patients often require the prompt removal of CIED hardware, including associated leads. Recent advancements in percutaneous methods have enabled physicians to face a myriad of complex lead extractions with efficiency and safety. Looking ahead, emerging technologies hold great promise in making extractions safer and more accessible for patients worldwide. This review will provide the most up-to-date indications and procedural approaches for lead extractions and insight on the future trends in this novel field.