Do barrier dressings reduce cardiac implantable device infection: Protocol for a randomized controlled trial (BARRIER-PROTECT).
Barrier
Cardiac implantable electronic device
Drape
Dressing
ICD
Infection
Pacemaker
Prevention
Swab
Journal
Heliyon
ISSN: 2405-8440
Titre abrégé: Heliyon
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101672560
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Dec 2023
Dec 2023
Historique:
received:
17
09
2023
revised:
03
11
2023
accepted:
07
11
2023
medline:
4
12
2023
pubmed:
4
12
2023
entrez:
4
12
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) procedures can be associated with serious complications, including infection with significant mortality and morbidity, necessitating removal of the device and prolonged hospitalization. One potential pathophysiological mechanism is pocket contamination at the time of device implantation. Therefore, steps taken to prevent contamination at this stage can potentially reduce CIED infections.The barrier dressing, an adhesive material applied to the skin, has the potential to reduce the colonization of the surgical site with host flora that can predispose to infection. There are a limited number of randomized prospective studies on barrier dressing use during various surgeries, but it has never been systematically studied in CIED implantation. Do Barrier Dressings Reduce Cardiac Implantable Device Infection? (BARRIER-PROTECT trial; NCT04591366) is a single-centre, prospective, double-armed, single-blinded, randomized controlled trial designed to evaluate the use of an intra-operative adhesive barrier dressing to reduce the risk of end-of-procedure pocket swab positivity. We hypothesize that adhesive draping during implant procedures will reduce the risk of contamination from the skin flora. Also, we aim to investigate if the end-of-procedure pocket swab culture positivity can be used as a potential surrogate marker of CIED infection. Patients undergoing a second or later procedure on the same device pocket (pulse generator change, lead/pocket revision or upgrade) will be enrolled. Eligible and consenting patients will be equally randomized to the use of barrier dressing or not using an automated web-based system. Patients, but not the operator, will be blinded to the arm. The person performing the pocket swabs will also be blinded. The primary endpoint is the end-of-procedure pocket swab culture positivity. The main secondary endpoint is the CIED infection rate. This is the first randomized controlled trial to assess the effectiveness of using a barrier adhesive draping on reducing the end-of-procedure pocket swab culture positivity. In this study, we are exploring a low-cost intervention that may significantly reduce CIED infection. Also, having a valid surrogate marker for CIED infection at the time of implant will facilitate design of future clinical trials.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) procedures can be associated with serious complications, including infection with significant mortality and morbidity, necessitating removal of the device and prolonged hospitalization. One potential pathophysiological mechanism is pocket contamination at the time of device implantation. Therefore, steps taken to prevent contamination at this stage can potentially reduce CIED infections.The barrier dressing, an adhesive material applied to the skin, has the potential to reduce the colonization of the surgical site with host flora that can predispose to infection. There are a limited number of randomized prospective studies on barrier dressing use during various surgeries, but it has never been systematically studied in CIED implantation.
Objectives
UNASSIGNED
Do Barrier Dressings Reduce Cardiac Implantable Device Infection? (BARRIER-PROTECT trial; NCT04591366) is a single-centre, prospective, double-armed, single-blinded, randomized controlled trial designed to evaluate the use of an intra-operative adhesive barrier dressing to reduce the risk of end-of-procedure pocket swab positivity. We hypothesize that adhesive draping during implant procedures will reduce the risk of contamination from the skin flora. Also, we aim to investigate if the end-of-procedure pocket swab culture positivity can be used as a potential surrogate marker of CIED infection.
Methods and Design
UNASSIGNED
Patients undergoing a second or later procedure on the same device pocket (pulse generator change, lead/pocket revision or upgrade) will be enrolled. Eligible and consenting patients will be equally randomized to the use of barrier dressing or not using an automated web-based system. Patients, but not the operator, will be blinded to the arm. The person performing the pocket swabs will also be blinded. The primary endpoint is the end-of-procedure pocket swab culture positivity. The main secondary endpoint is the CIED infection rate.
Discussion
UNASSIGNED
This is the first randomized controlled trial to assess the effectiveness of using a barrier adhesive draping on reducing the end-of-procedure pocket swab culture positivity. In this study, we are exploring a low-cost intervention that may significantly reduce CIED infection. Also, having a valid surrogate marker for CIED infection at the time of implant will facilitate design of future clinical trials.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38046145
doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e22229
pii: S2405-8440(23)09437-9
pmc: PMC10686845
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
e22229Informations de copyright
© 2023 The Authors.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Références
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2015 Feb;38(2):231-9
pubmed: 25243484
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2004 Jun;25(6):492-7
pubmed: 15242198
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Apr 22;(4):CD006353
pubmed: 25901509
J Hosp Infect. 1989 Apr;13(3):267-72
pubmed: 2567756
Nature. 2007 Oct 18;449(7164):843-9
pubmed: 17943121
N Engl J Med. 2019 May 16;380(20):1895-1905
pubmed: 30883056
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2005 Dec;28(12):1276-81
pubmed: 16403159
Ann Intern Med. 2000 Oct 17;133(8):604-8
pubmed: 11033588
J Infect. 1991 Sep;23(2):161-7
pubmed: 1753115
Br J Surg. 1977 Oct;64(10):729-32
pubmed: 922295
Burns Incl Therm Inj. 1984 Feb;10(3):217-24
pubmed: 6426705
Circ J. 2015;79(8):1712-8
pubmed: 25971526
Europace. 2010 Jan;12(1):58-63
pubmed: 19861383
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2012 Apr;5(2):433-41
pubmed: 22511660
Aust N Z J Surg. 1987 Nov;57(11):859-63
pubmed: 3326567
AORN J. 2002 Nov;76(5):821-8
pubmed: 12463081
Heart Rhythm. 2008 Jun;5(6):934-55
pubmed: 18534377
Annu Rev Microbiol. 1994;48:585-617
pubmed: 7826020
Br J Surg. 1971 May;58(5):340-2
pubmed: 4930141
Circulation. 1998 May 12;97(18):1791-5
pubmed: 9603533
Circulation. 2010 Apr 20;121(15):1691-7
pubmed: 20368521
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007 May 8;49(18):1851-9
pubmed: 17481444
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2011 Feb;34(2):143-9
pubmed: 20561226
Diabet Med. 2001 Oct;18(10):822-7
pubmed: 11678973
Ostomy Wound Manage. 2001 Jan;47(1):34-7
pubmed: 11889654
Europace. 2008 Sep;10(9):1067-72
pubmed: 18658253
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018 Dec 18;72(24):3098-3109
pubmed: 30545448
Europace. 2018 Jul 1;20(7):1217
pubmed: 29566158
J Hosp Infect. 2001 Mar;47(3):230-4
pubmed: 11247684
Aust N Z J Surg. 1993 Oct;63(10):798-801
pubmed: 8274123
Arch Mal Coeur Vaiss. 1998 Jun;91(6):753-7
pubmed: 9749192