Suppr超能文献

心脏植入式设备患者的经静脉导线拔除:全身和局部感染对临床结局的影响——一项欧洲心脏病学会-欧洲心律协会ELECTRa(欧洲导线拔除对照)注册研究的子研究

Transvenous Lead Extraction in Patients with Cardiac Implantable Device: The Impact of Systemic and Local Infection on Clinical Outcomes-An ESC-EHRA ELECTRa (European Lead Extraction Controlled) Registry Substudy.

作者信息

Diemberger Igor, Segreti Luca, Rinaldi Christopher A, Svendsen Jesper Hastrup, Kutarski Andrzej, Younis Arwa, Laroche Cécile, Leclercq Christophe, Małecka Barbara, Mitkowski Przemyslaw, Bongiorni Maria Grazia

机构信息

Institute of Cardiology, Department of Experimental, Diagnostic and Specialty Medicine, University of Bologna, 40138 Bologna, Italy.

Cardiology Unit, IRCCS, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Di Bologna, 40138 Bologna, Italy.

出版信息

Biology (Basel). 2022 Apr 18;11(4):615. doi: 10.3390/biology11040615.

Abstract

Background: Infections of cardiac implantable devices (CIEDI) have poor outcomes despite improvement in lead extraction (TLE) procedures. Methods: To explore the influence of CIEDI on the outcomes of TLE and the differences between patients with systemic (Sy) vs. local (Lo) CIEDI, we performed a sub-analysis of the EORP ELECTRa (European Lead Extraction ConTRolled) Registry. Results: Among 3555 patients enrolled by 73 centers in 19 Countries, the indication for TLE was CIEDI in 1850: 1170 with Lo-CIEDI and 680 with Sy-CIEDI. Patients with CIEDI had a worse in-hospital prognosis in terms of major complications (3.57% vs. 1.71%; p = 0.0007) and mortality (2.27% vs. 0.49%; p < 0.0001). Sy-CIEDI was an independent predictor of in-hospital death (H.R. 2.14; 95%CI 1.06−4.33. p = 0.0345). Patients with Sy-CIEDI more frequently had an initial CIED implant and a higher prevalence of comorbidities, while subjects with Lo-CIEDI had a higher prevalence of previous CIED procedures. Time from signs of CIEDI and TLE was longer for Lo-CIEDI despite a shorter pre-TLE antibiotic treatment. Conclusions: Patients with CIEDI have a worse in-hospital prognosis after TLE, especially for patients with Sy-CIEDI. These results raise the suspicion that in a relevant group of patients CIEDI can be systemic from the beginning without progression from Lo-CIEDI. Future research is needed to characterize this subgroup of patients.

摘要

背景

尽管导线拔除(TLE)程序有所改进,但心脏植入式设备感染(CIEDI)的预后仍较差。方法:为探讨CIEDI对TLE结果的影响以及全身性(Sy)与局部性(Lo)CIEDI患者之间的差异,我们对EORP ELECTRa(欧洲导线拔除对照)注册研究进行了亚组分析。结果:在19个国家73个中心登记的3555例患者中,1850例TLE的指征为CIEDI:1170例为Lo-CIEDI,680例为Sy-CIEDI。CIEDI患者在主要并发症(3.57%对1.71%;p = 0.0007)和死亡率(2.27%对0.49%;p < 0.0001)方面的住院预后较差。Sy-CIEDI是住院死亡的独立预测因素(风险比2.14;95%置信区间1.06−4.33,p = 0.0345)。Sy-CIEDI患者更常进行初次CIED植入且合并症患病率更高,而Lo-CIEDI患者既往CIED程序的患病率更高。尽管TLE前抗生素治疗时间较短,但Lo-CIEDI从CIEDI体征到TLE的时间更长。结论:CIEDI患者TLE后的住院预后较差,尤其是Sy-CIEDI患者。这些结果引发了一种怀疑,即在相当一部分患者中,CIEDI可能从一开始就是全身性的,而非从Lo-CIEDI进展而来。需要进一步研究来明确这一亚组患者的特征。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/db2b/9033150/cc744ce5928f/biology-11-00615-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验