Bridge pacemaker with an externalized active fixation lead for pacemaker-dependent patients with device infection.
bridge pacemaker
cardiac implantable electronic device
infection
lead extraction
temporary pacing
Journal
Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE
ISSN: 1540-8159
Titre abrégé: Pacing Clin Electrophysiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7803944
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 2022
06 2022
Historique:
revised:
22
02
2022
received:
22
12
2021
accepted:
11
03
2022
pubmed:
1
4
2022
medline:
22
6
2022
entrez:
31
3
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The risk of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device (CIED) infection has been increasing in recent years. For pacemaker-dependent patients, a temporary pacemaker is needed before a new device can be implanted. The aim of this study is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of using a temporary pacing device with an externalized active fixation lead (bridge pacemaker) before a new device can be implanted in pacemaker-dependent patients with device infection. All patients who were admitted to our cardiac center with CIED infection and in need of bridge pacemaker implantation from April 2013 to August 2020 were prospectively enrolled in this observational study. The medical records of all patients were collected and evaluated. All procedure-related complications were also collected. Long-term outcomes, including reinfection and death within 1 year after hospital discharge, were collected through telephone follow-ups. During the study period, 1050 patients underwent CIED extraction, of which 312 pacemaker-dependent patients underwent bridge pacemaker implantation. The mean age of the extracted leads was 44 ± 38.7 months. The bridge pacemakers were in use for a mean duration of 6 days. Nine patients developed procedure-related complications including pericardial tamponade, pneumothorax, peripheral venous thrombosis, and pulmonary embolism. Three patients developed complications that were related to their bridge pacemakers, including lead dislodgement, over-sensing and elevated pacing threshold. During the 1-year follow-up, it was found that four patients had developed CIED reinfection and three patients had died due to cardiac-related reasons. A bridge pacemaker with an externalized active fixation lead is safe and efficacious for pacemaker-dependent patients with device infection.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The risk of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device (CIED) infection has been increasing in recent years. For pacemaker-dependent patients, a temporary pacemaker is needed before a new device can be implanted. The aim of this study is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of using a temporary pacing device with an externalized active fixation lead (bridge pacemaker) before a new device can be implanted in pacemaker-dependent patients with device infection.
METHODS
All patients who were admitted to our cardiac center with CIED infection and in need of bridge pacemaker implantation from April 2013 to August 2020 were prospectively enrolled in this observational study. The medical records of all patients were collected and evaluated. All procedure-related complications were also collected. Long-term outcomes, including reinfection and death within 1 year after hospital discharge, were collected through telephone follow-ups.
RESULTS
During the study period, 1050 patients underwent CIED extraction, of which 312 pacemaker-dependent patients underwent bridge pacemaker implantation. The mean age of the extracted leads was 44 ± 38.7 months. The bridge pacemakers were in use for a mean duration of 6 days. Nine patients developed procedure-related complications including pericardial tamponade, pneumothorax, peripheral venous thrombosis, and pulmonary embolism. Three patients developed complications that were related to their bridge pacemakers, including lead dislodgement, over-sensing and elevated pacing threshold. During the 1-year follow-up, it was found that four patients had developed CIED reinfection and three patients had died due to cardiac-related reasons.
CONCLUSIONS
A bridge pacemaker with an externalized active fixation lead is safe and efficacious for pacemaker-dependent patients with device infection.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Observational Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
761-767Informations de copyright
© 2022 Wiley Periodicals LLC.
Références
Kurtz SM, Ochoa JA, Lau E, et al. Implantation trends and patient profiles for pacemakers and implantable cardioverter defibrillators in the United States: 1993-2006. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2010;33(6):705-711.
Voigt A, Shalaby A, Saba S. Rising rates of cardiac rhythm management device infections in the United States: 1996 through 2003. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;48(3):590-591.
Greenspon AJ, Patel JD, Lau E, et al. 16-year trends in the infection burden for pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in the United States 1993 to 2008. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;58(10):1001-1006.
Harrison JL, Prendergast BD, Sandoe JA. Guidelines for the diagnosis, management and prevention of implantable cardiac electronic device infection. Heart. 2015;101(4):250-252.
Habib G, Lancellotti P, Antunes MJ, et al. 2015 ESC Guidelines for the management of infective endocarditis: the Task Force for the Management of Infective Endocarditis of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Endorsed by: European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS), the European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM). Eur Heart J. 2015;36(44):3075-3128.
Baddour LM, Epstein AE, Erickson CC, et al. Update on cardiovascular implantable electronic device infections and their management: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2010;121(3):458-477.
Wilkoff BL, Love CJ, Byrd CL, et al. Transvenous lead extraction: Heart Rhythm Society expert consensus on facilities, training, indications, and patient management: this document was endorsed by the American Heart Association (AHA). Heart Rhythm. 2009;6(7):1085-1104.
Lang CC, Grubb NR. Hybrid long-term temporary pacing. J Invasive Cardiol. 2005;17(6):338-339.
Klug D, Lacroix D, Savoye C, et al. Systemic infection related to endocarditis on pacemaker leads: clinical presentation and management. Circulation. 1997;95(8):2098-2107.
Rastan AJ, Doll N, Walther T, Mohr FW. Pacemaker dependent patients with device infection-a modified approach. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2005;27(6):1116-1118.
Durack DT, Lukes AS, Bright DK. New criteria for diagnosis of infective endocarditis: utilization of specific echocardiographic findings. Duke Endocarditis Service. Am J Med. 1994;96(3):200-209.
Choo MH, Holmes DJ, Gersh BJ, et al. Permanent pacemaker infections: characterization and management. Am J Cardiol. 1981;48(3):559-564.
Polyzos KA, Konstantelias AA, Falagas ME. Risk factors for cardiac implantable electronic device infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Europace. 2015;17(5):767-777.
Nishii N, Morimoto Y, Miyoshi A, et al. Prognosis after lead extraction in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices infection: comparison of lead-related infective endocarditis with pocket infection in a Japanese single-center experience. J Arrhythm. 2019;35(4):654-663.
Hynes JK, Holmes DJ, Harrison CE. Five-year experience with temporary pacemaker therapy in the coronary care unit. Mayo Clin Proc. 1983;58(2):122-126.
Jafri SM, Kruse JA. Temporary transvenous cardiac pacing. Crit Care Clin. 1992;8(4):713-725.
Kawata H, Pretorius V, Phan H, et al. Utility and safety of temporary pacing using active fixation leads and externalized re-usable permanent pacemakers after lead extraction. Europace. 2013;15(9):1287-1291.
Murphy JJ. Current practice and complications of temporary transvenous cardiac pacing. BMJ. 1996 ;312(7039):1134.
Braun MU, Rauwolf T, Bock M, et al. Percutaneous lead implantation connected to an external device in stimulation-dependent patients with systemic infection-a prospective and controlled study. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2006;29(8):875-879.
Chihrin SM, Mohammed U, Yee R, et al. Utility and cost effectiveness of temporary pacing using active fixation leads and an externally placed reusable permanent pacemaker. Am J Cardiol. 2006;98(12):1613-1615.
Pecha S, Aydin MA, Yildirim Y, et al. Transcutaneous lead implantation connected to an externalized pacemaker in patients with implantable cardiac defibrillator/pacemaker infection and pacemaker dependency. Europace. 2013;15(8):1205-1209.
Cipriano R, Gupta A, Subzposh F, et al. Outcomes of standard permanent active fixation leads for temporary pacing. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2020;6(3):304-310.
Leong D, Sovari AA, Ehdaie A, et al. Permanent-temporary pacemakers in the management of patients with conduction abnormalities after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2018;52(1):111-116.
Chua JD, Wilkoff BL, Lee I, Juratli N, Longworth DL, Gordon SM. Diagnosis and management of infections involving implantable electrophysiologic cardiac devices. Ann Intern Med. 2000;133(8):604-608.
Nandyala R, Parsonnet V. One stage side-to-side replacement of infected pulse generators and leads. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2006;29(4):393-396.