Shariff Nasir, Eby Elizabeth, Adelstein Evan, Jain Sandeep, Shalaby Alaa, Saba Samir, Wang Norman C, Schwartzman David
Heart, Lung and Vascular Medicine Institute, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.
Medtronic Incorporated, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2015 Jul;26(7):783-9. doi: 10.1111/jce.12684. Epub 2015 May 25.
Infection of cardiac implanted electrical devices (CIED) is a problem. In selected patients, use of an "antibacterial envelope" (AIGISRx®) is associated with low CIED infection rates. The value of this device when used as a standard of care is unclear.
Retrospective analysis of all patients (N = 1,476) who underwent CIED implantation at a single hospital. During the study period, some implanters used the AIGISRx as a standard of care (Yes-AIGISRx Group, N = 365), whereas others did not use it at all (No-AIGISRx Group, N = 1,111). A risk score based on preoperative factors was calculated for each patient. Rates of CIED infection within 6 months were measured, and associated costs were estimated. The Yes-AIGISRx and No-AIGISRx groups had similar preoperative infection risk. In the No-AIGISRx group, 19 infections were observed (1.7%), versus 0 in the Yes-AIGISRx group (P = 0.006). The 6-month mortality rate among patients with infection was significantly greater than among those without infection (15.7% vs. 4.5%, P = 0.021). The average hospital duration for infection care was 13 days. By extrapolating the infection rate and costs observed in the No-AIGISRx group to the Yes-AIGISRx group, we estimated that there would have been 6.2 additional infections costing approximately $340,000. This cost was similar to the actual cost of the devices in the Yes-AIGISRx group, estimated at $320,000.
Standard of care use of an antibacterial envelope as a standard of care was associated with a significantly lower rate of CIED infection, and appeared to be economically reasonable. Prospective trials to address these findings may be worthwhile.
心脏植入式电子装置(CIED)感染是一个问题。在部分患者中,使用“抗菌封套”(AIGISRx®)与较低的CIED感染率相关。该装置作为一种护理标准使用时的价值尚不清楚。
对在一家医院接受CIED植入的所有患者(N = 1476)进行回顾性分析。在研究期间,一些植入者将AIGISRx作为护理标准使用(使用AIGISRx组,N = 365),而其他植入者根本未使用(未使用AIGISRx组,N = 1111)。为每位患者计算基于术前因素的风险评分。测量6个月内CIED感染率,并估算相关成本。使用AIGISRx组和未使用AIGISRx组术前感染风险相似。在未使用AIGISRx组中,观察到19例感染(1.7%),而使用AIGISRx组为0例(P = 0.006)。感染患者的6个月死亡率显著高于未感染患者(15.7%对4.5%,P = 0.021)。感染护理的平均住院时长为13天。通过将未使用AIGISRx组观察到的感染率和成本推算至使用AIGISRx组,我们估计会额外出现6.2例感染,成本约为340,000美元。这一成本与使用AIGISRx组装置的实际成本相似,估计为320,000美元。
将抗菌封套作为护理标准使用与显著更低的CIED感染率相关,且在经济上似乎是合理的。针对这些发现开展前瞻性试验可能是值得的。