TY - JOUR
T1 - Prognosis after lead extraction in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices infection
T2 - Comparison of lead-related infective endocarditis with pocket infection in a Japanese single-center experience
AU - Nishii, Nobuhiro
AU - Morimoto, Yoshimasa
AU - Miyoshi, Akihito
AU - Tsukuda, Saori
AU - Miyamoto, Masakazu
AU - Kawada, Satoshi
AU - Nakagawa, Koji
AU - Watanabe, Atsuyuki
AU - Nakamura, Kazufumi
AU - Morita, Hiroshi
AU - Morimatsu, Hiroshi
AU - Kusano, Nobuchika
AU - Kasahara, Shingo
AU - Shoda, Morio
AU - Ito, Hiroshi
N1 - Funding Information:
The authors would like to thank Roger Carrillo, MD, PhD, and Maria Grazia Bongiorni, MD, PhD for educating regarding lead extraction; Zenitsu Masuda, MD, PhD, Masami Takagaki, MD, PhD, Yosuke Kroko, MD, PhD, and Hiroki Eto, MD for the surgical backup; Hirotaka Iguchi, Norihiro Nishiyama, and Yuki Takenaka for medical engineering work; and Yuko Kobayashi, Miyuki Fujiwara, and Masayo Ohmori for secretarial work.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 The Authors. Journal of Arrhythmia published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of the Japanese Heart Rhythm Society.
PY - 2019/8
Y1 - 2019/8
N2 - Background: The increase in the use of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) has been associated with an increase in CIED-related infections. Transvenous lead extraction is safe and effective for patients with CIED-related infections; however, the mortality rate in these patients is high. The prognosis after transvenous lead extraction in Japanese patients, especially those with lead-related infective endocarditis, has not been evaluated. Then, the purpose of this study is to clarify the prognosis after transvenous lead extraction in Japanese patients with CIED-related infections at a single Japanese center. Methods: A total of 107 patients who underwent transvenous lead extraction were retrospectively reviewed. The patients were divided into a lead-related infective endocarditis group (n = 32) and a pocket infection group (n = 75). Procedure success rate and prognosis after lead extraction were evaluated between the two groups. Results: Procedure success rate was not significantly different between the groups. There were no deaths associated with the procedure or with infection. The survival rate was not significantly different at 1 year or at a median of 816 days (lead-related infective endocarditis vs pocket infection; 93.7% vs 94.7%, P = 1.000; 78.1% vs 81.3%, P = 0.791) Time to reimplantation and duration of hospital stay and antibiotics therapy were significantly longer for patients with lead-related infective endocarditis. Conclusion: In this study, the prognosis for patients with lead-related infective endocarditis after transvenous lead extraction was favorable. Thus, extraction should be strongly recommended, even if the general condition of the patient is poor.
AB - Background: The increase in the use of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) has been associated with an increase in CIED-related infections. Transvenous lead extraction is safe and effective for patients with CIED-related infections; however, the mortality rate in these patients is high. The prognosis after transvenous lead extraction in Japanese patients, especially those with lead-related infective endocarditis, has not been evaluated. Then, the purpose of this study is to clarify the prognosis after transvenous lead extraction in Japanese patients with CIED-related infections at a single Japanese center. Methods: A total of 107 patients who underwent transvenous lead extraction were retrospectively reviewed. The patients were divided into a lead-related infective endocarditis group (n = 32) and a pocket infection group (n = 75). Procedure success rate and prognosis after lead extraction were evaluated between the two groups. Results: Procedure success rate was not significantly different between the groups. There were no deaths associated with the procedure or with infection. The survival rate was not significantly different at 1 year or at a median of 816 days (lead-related infective endocarditis vs pocket infection; 93.7% vs 94.7%, P = 1.000; 78.1% vs 81.3%, P = 0.791) Time to reimplantation and duration of hospital stay and antibiotics therapy were significantly longer for patients with lead-related infective endocarditis. Conclusion: In this study, the prognosis for patients with lead-related infective endocarditis after transvenous lead extraction was favorable. Thus, extraction should be strongly recommended, even if the general condition of the patient is poor.
KW - implantable cardioverter defibrillator
KW - lead extraction
KW - lead-related infective endocarditis
KW - pacemaker
KW - pocket infection
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85070414286&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85070414286&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1002/joa3.12164
DO - 10.1002/joa3.12164
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85070414286
SN - 1880-4276
VL - 35
SP - 654
EP - 663
JO - journal of arrhythmia
JF - journal of arrhythmia
IS - 4
ER -