CIED infection

CI ED 感染
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:心脏可植入电子设备(CIED)感染是医院的负担,对医疗保健系统而言成本高昂。慢性肾脏病(CKD)增加CIED感染的风险,但它对医疗保健利用的不同影响,成本,结果未知。
    结果:这项回顾性分析使用去识别的Medicare按服务收费索赔来识别2016年7月至2020年12月植入aCIED的患者。结果定义为植入后12个月内的住院天数和费用,感染后CKD进展,和死亡率。在控制其他合并症的同时,使用广义线性模型来计算CKD和感染状态的结果。队列之间的差异代表了与CKD相关的增量效应。共有584543名患者接受了aCIED植入,其中26%患有CKD,1.4%患有器械感染.感染CKD患者的平均住院天数为23.5天,与14.5天(P<0.001)无。CKD与CKD的平均感染成本为121756美元。$55366无(P<0.001),导致与CKD相关的增量成本为66390美元。与没有CKD的患者相比,感染CKD的患者更容易患败血症或严重败血症(11.0vs.4.6%,P<0.001)。感染后,CKD患者更可能出现CKD进展(风险比1.26,P<0.001)和死亡率(风险比1.89,P<0.001)。
    结论:CKD患者的心脏植入式电子设备感染与更多的医疗保健利用相关,更高的成本,更大的疾病进展,与无CKD患者相比,死亡率更高。
    OBJECTIVE: Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infections are a burden to hospitals and costly for healthcare systems. Chronic kidney disease (CKD) increases the risk of CIED infections, but its differential impact on healthcare utilization, costs, and outcomes is not known.
    RESULTS: This retrospective analysis used de-identified Medicare Fee-for-Service claims to identify patients implanted with a CIED from July 2016 to December 2020. Outcomes were defined as hospital days and costs within 12 months post-implant, post-infection CKD progression, and mortality. Generalized linear models were used to calculate results by CKD and infection status while controlling for other comorbidities, with differences between cohorts representing the incremental effect associated with CKD. A total of 584 543 patients had a CIED implant, of which 26% had CKD and 1.4% had a device infection. The average total days in hospital for infected patients was 23.5 days with CKD vs. 14.5 days (P < 0.001) without. The average cost of infection was $121 756 with CKD vs. $55 366 without (P < 0.001), leading to an incremental cost associated with CKD of $66 390. Infected patients with CKD were more likely to have septicaemia or severe sepsis than those without CKD (11.0 vs. 4.6%, P < 0.001). After infection, CKD patients were more likely to experience CKD progression (hazard ratio 1.26, P < 0.001) and mortality (hazard ratio 1.89, P < 0.001).
    CONCLUSIONS: Cardiac implantable electronic device infection in patients with CKD was associated with more healthcare utilization, higher cost, greater disease progression, and greater mortality compared to patients without CKD.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    心脏植入式电子设备(CIED)感染是与设备植入相关的最具威胁性的并发症之一。由于发病率和死亡率的增加,以及医疗费用。此外,重要的是要强调,与最初植入设备相比,与诸如发电机更换之类的程序相关的风险,铅和口袋修订,或设备升级双。因此,为了解决这个问题,各种评分系统,像PADIT(事先程序,年龄,肾功能下降,免疫受损状态,程序类型),RI-AIAC(RicercaSulleInfezioniAssociateaImpiAntooSostitutzionediCIED),还有Shariff得分,以及预测模型,已开发用于识别感染风险更大的患者。此外,已经评估了几种干预措施以评估其在感染预防中的作用,从改善皮肤准备和手术技术到考虑替代策略,例如皮下植入式心脏复律除颤器(ICD)。预防抗菌药物等方法,口袋灌溉,葡萄糖酸氯己定口袋灌洗,囊切除术,还探索了使用抗菌信封作为预防措施。在这次审查中,我们提供了对重复手术患者的CIED感染的全面评估,以及旨在降低这些感染风险的策略.
    Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infections represent one of the most threatening complications associated with device implantation, due to an increase in morbidity and mortality rates, as well as healthcare costs. Besides, it is important to highlight that when compared to the initial implantation of a device, the risks associated with procedures like generator changes, lead and pocket revisions, or device upgrades double. Consequently, to address this issue, various scoring systems, like the PADIT (Prior Procedures, Age, Depressed Renal Function, Immunocompromised Status, Type of Procedure), the RI-AIAC (Ricerca Sulle Infezioni Associate a ImpiAnto o Sostituzione di CIED), and the Shariff score, along with predictive models, have been developed to identify patients at a greater risk of infection. Moreover, several interventions have been assessed to evaluate their role in infection prevention ranging from improving skin preparation and surgical techniques to considering alternative strategies such as the subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator (ICD). Methods like antimicrobial prophylaxis, pocket irrigation, chlorhexidine gluconate pocket lavage, capsulectomy, and the use of antibacterial envelopes have been also explored as preventive measures. In this review, we provide a comprehensive assessment of CIED infections in patients undergoing repeat procedures and the strategies designed to reduce the risk of these infections.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Case Reports
    随着介入心脏病学的不断增加,心脏设备感染的数量(包括起搏器,人工瓣膜,冠状动脉和主动脉支架)也有所增加。这些感染可导致显著的发病率,并且如果不及时管理,甚至可导致死亡。如果临床怀疑,一线成像模式是经胸超声心动图,而经食管超声心动图也用于选定的病例。心脏设备感染的确认主要是在血液或脓液培养的帮助下完成的。尽管超声心动图是评估心脏的一种非常有效的技术,它不能区分感染和血栓或纤维化。随着全球范围内正电子发射断层扫描CT(PETCT)机器的日益普及,使用18F-FDGPETCT进行感染成像已获得牵引力,尤其是心脏设备感染。大多数最近的研究表明18F-FDGPETCT具有良好的诊断准确性,许多最近的诊断和管理指南现在承认其作用,尤其是在模棱两可的情况下。我们提出了六个这样的病例,其中18F-FDGPETCT为诊断提供了有价值的信息,确认感染的存在,划定范围,治疗反应,有时甚至帮助怀疑有心脏装置感染的患者做出适当的治疗决策。
    With the increasing number of interventional cardiology procedures, the number of cardiac device infections (including pacemakers, prosthetic valves, coronary and aortic stents) have also increased. These infections can cause significant morbidity and can even lead to mortality if not managed promptly. If suspected clinically the first-line imaging modality is Trans-Thoracic Echocardiography, while Transesophageal Echocardiography is also used in selected cases. The confirmation of a cardiac device infection is mostly done with the help of blood or pus culture. Even though Echocardiography is a very efficient technique for the evaluation of the heart, it cannot differentiate infection from thrombus or fibrosis. With the increasing availability of Positron Emission Tomography CT (PET CT) machines worldwide, the use of 18F-FDG PET CT for infection imaging has gained traction, especially for cardiac device infection. Most of the recent studies show a good diagnostic accuracy of 18F-FDG PET CT with many of the recent diagnostic and management guidelines now acknowledging its role, especially in equivocal cases. We present six such cases where 18F-FDG PET CT provided valuable information either for diagnosis, confirming the presence of infection, delineating extent, therapy response or sometimes even helping appropriate treatment decision making in patients with suspected cardiac device infection.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Editorial
    暂无摘要。
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:心脏可植入电子设备(CIED)感染是医院的负担,对医疗保健系统而言成本高昂。慢性肾脏病(CKD)增加CIED感染的风险,但它对医疗保健利用的不同影响,成本,结果未知。
    方法:这项回顾性分析使用了从2016年7月至2020年12月取消识别的Medicare服务费(FFS)索赔来识别植入aCIED的患者。结果定义为植入后12个月内的住院天数和费用,感染后CKD进展和死亡率。在控制其他合并症的同时,使用广义线性模型来计算CKD和感染状态的结果。队列之间的差异代表了与CKD相关的增量效应。
    结果:共有584,543名患者进行了aCIED植入,其中26%患有CKD,1.4%患有器械感染.感染CKD患者的平均住院天数为23.5天,而非CKD患者为14.5天(p<.001)。CKD的平均感染成本为$121,756,而非CKD的平均感染成本为$55,366(p<0.001),导致与CKD相关的增量成本为66,390美元。与没有CKD的患者相比,感染CKD的患者更容易发生败血症或严重败血症(11.0%vs4.6%,p<.001)。感染后,CKD患者更有可能出现CKD进展(HR1.26,p<.001)和死亡率(HR1.89,p<.001)。
    结论:CKD患者的CIED感染与更多的医疗保健利用相关,更高的成本,更大的疾病进展,与无CKD患者相比,死亡率更高。
    OBJECTIVE: Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infections are a burden to hospitals and costly for healthcare systems. Chronic kidney disease (CKD) increases the risk of CIED infections, but its differential impact on healthcare utilization, costs, and outcomes is not known.
    RESULTS: This retrospective analysis used de-identified Medicare Fee-for-Service claims to identify patients implanted with a CIED from July 2016 to December 2020. Outcomes were defined as hospital days and costs within 12 months post-implant, post-infection CKD progression, and mortality. Generalized linear models were used to calculate results by CKD and infection status while controlling for other comorbidities, with differences between cohorts representing the incremental effect associated with CKD. A total of 584 543 patients had a CIED implant, of which 26% had CKD and 1.4% had a device infection. The average total days in hospital for infected patients was 23.5 days with CKD vs. 14.5 days (P < 0.001) without. The average cost of infection was $121 756 with CKD vs. $55 366 without (P < 0.001), leading to an incremental cost associated with CKD of $66 390. Infected patients with CKD were more likely to have septicaemia or severe sepsis than those without CKD (11.0 vs. 4.6%, P < 0.001). After infection, CKD patients were more likely to experience CKD progression (hazard ratio 1.26, P < 0.001) and mortality (hazard ratio 1.89, P < 0.001).
    CONCLUSIONS: Cardiac implantable electronic device infection in patients with CKD was associated with more healthcare utilization, higher cost, greater disease progression, and greater mortality compared to patients without CKD.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    心血管可植入电子设备(CIED)感染是设备取出的常见适应症。早期诊断和完整的系统切除对于降低发病率和死亡率至关重要。缺乏明确的感染症状使得口袋感染的诊断具有挑战性,并且可能会延迟转诊。
    我们旨在确定炎症生物标志物是否可以帮助诊断ED孤立口袋感染。
    我们对2012年至2022年在加利福尼亚大学圣地亚哥分校因CIED感染而接受静脉引线拔除的所有患者进行了回顾性分析(N=156)。患者分为全身感染(n=88)或孤立囊袋感染(n=68)。术前前瞻性收集降钙素原(PCT),C反应蛋白,比较各组白细胞计数。
    成对比较显示,全身感染组的PCT高于对照组(P<.001)和口袋感染组(P=.009)。然而,对照组和孤立囊袋感染受试者之间的PCT值没有显着差异。与我们的对照组相比,较高的白细胞计数仅与全身感染有关(P=0.018)。
    在诊断为CIED感染需要拔除的患者中,孤立囊袋感染中炎症生物标志物未升高.炎症标志物不能预测口袋感染的诊断,这最终需要高度的临床怀疑。
    UNASSIGNED: Cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) infections are a common indication for device extraction. Early diagnosis and complete system removal are crucial to reduce morbidity and mortality. The lack of clear infectious symptoms makes the diagnosis of pocket infections challenging and may delay referral for extraction.
    UNASSIGNED: We aimed to determine if inflammatory biomarkers can help diagnose CIED isolated pocket infection.
    UNASSIGNED: We performed a retrospective analysis of all patients undergoing transvenous lead extraction for CIED infection at the University of California San Diego from 2012 to 2022 (N = 156). Patients were classified as systemic infection (n = 88) or isolated pocket infection (n = 68). Prospectively collected preoperative procalcitonin (PCT), C-reactive protein, and white blood cell count were compared between groups.
    UNASSIGNED: Pairwise comparisons revealed that the systemic infection group had a higher PCT than the control group (P < .001) and the pocket infection group (P = .009). However, there was no significant difference in PCT value between control subjects and isolated pocket infection subjects. Higher white blood cell count was only associated with systemic infection when compared with our control group (P = .018).
    UNASSIGNED: In patients diagnosed with CIED infections requiring extraction, inflammatory biomarkers were not elevated in isolated pocket infection. Inflammatory markers are not predictive of the diagnosis of pocket infections, which ultimately requires a high level of clinical suspicion.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    心脏可植入电子设备(CIED)和金黄色葡萄球菌菌血症(SAB)的患者有感染CIED的风险,口袋感染或心内膜炎。为了避免治疗失败,指南建议在所有SAB病例中均应进行CIED的提取,但最近的研究表明提取率低,复发风险低.该研究的目的是描述一个瑞典基于人群的CIED和SAB患者队列,提取率,治疗失败被测量为复发性SAB。
    在卡罗林斯卡实验室数据库中确定患有SAB的患者,为190万人口服务,从2015年1月至2019年12月,我们与瑞典ICD和起搏器登记处进行了匹配.包括CIED和SAB患者。从医疗记录中收集临床数据。
    确定了274名患者的队列,其中38名患者(14%)进行了CIED提取。与拔牙相关的因素是年龄较低,较低的Charlson合并症指数,自ED植入以来的时间较短,和非医院获取,但不是死亡率。没有患者接受终身抗生素治疗。16例(6%)患者在一年内复发SAB,接受萃取的患者中有2例(5%),未接受CIED萃取的患者中有14例(6%)。在复发发作期间,发现14例患者中有3例患有明确的心内膜炎。
    尽管提取率低,很少有复发。我们建议如果口袋感染,可以省略CIED的提取,CIED的变化,或未检测到明确的心内膜炎。
    UNASSIGNED: Patients with cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) and Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia (SAB) are at risk of having CIED infection, pocket infection or endocarditis. To avoid treatment failures, guidelines recommend that the CIED should be extracted in all cases of SAB butrecent studies indicate low extraction rates and low risk of relapse. The aim of the study was to describe a Swedish population-based cohort of patients with CIED and SAB, the rate of extraction, and treatment failure measured as recurrent SAB.
    UNASSIGNED: Patients identified to have SAB in the Karolinska Laboratory database, serving a population of 1.9 million, from January 2015 through December 2019 were matched to the Swedish ICD and Pacemaker Registry. Patients with CIED and SAB were included. Clinical data were collected from medical records.
    UNASSIGNED: A cohort of 274 patients was identified and 38 patients (14%)had the CIED extracted. Factors associated with extraction were lower age, lower Charlson comorbidity index, shorter time since CIED implantation, and non-nosocomial acquisition, but not mortality. No patient was put on lifelong antibiotic treatment. Sixteen patients (6%) had a recurrent SAB within one year, two in patients subjected to extraction (5%) and 14 in patients not subjected to CIED-extraction (6%). Three of the 14 patients were found to have definite endocarditis during the recurrent episode.
    UNASSIGNED: Despite a low extraction rate, there were few recurrences. We suggest that extraction of the CIED might be omitted if pocket infection, changes on the CIED, or definite endocarditis are not detected.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    自20世纪中叶以来,起搏器一直是缓慢心律失常管理的基石。尽管传统的经静脉起搏器的广泛使用和成功,它们与三年内估计15%的并发症发生率相关。受传统经静脉起搏器的优势驱动,包括缺乏经静脉导线,抵抗感染,易于植入,自最初批准以来,每年在美国放置的无引线起搏器的数量急剧增加。虽然目前的无引线起搏器迭代缺乏经静脉设备提供的多功能性,无引线起搏的最新进展提供了越来越多样化的治疗选择.这篇评论将讨论过去,present,和未来的新兴技术,以及无引线起搏的策略。
    Pacemakers have been the cornerstone of brady-arrhythmia management since the mid-20th century. Despite the widespread use and success of traditional transvenous pacemakers, they are associated with an estimated 15 % complication rate at three years. Driven by the advantages over traditional transvenous pacemakers including a lack of transvenous leads, resistance to infection, and ease of implantation, the number of leadless pacemakers placed annually in the United States has dramatically increased since their initial approval. While current iterations of leadless pacemakers lack the versatility offered by transvenous devices, recent advances in leadless pacing offer an increasingly diverse range of therapeutic options. This review will discuss the past, present, and future emerging technologies, and strategies in leadless pacing.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Letter
    暂无摘要。
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    暂无摘要。
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

公众号