IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Italy.
St. Vincenz Hospital, Paderborn, Germany; MAESTRIA Consortium AFNET, Münster, Germany.
Int J Cardiol. 2024 Nov 15;415:132454. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2024.132454. Epub 2024 Aug 14.
Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device (CIED) infections pose significant mortality and morbidity despite optimal treatment. This survey aimed to understand whether and how the risk of CIED infection is assessed and mitigated in clinical practice in Europe, and to detect gaps with respect to EHRA recommendations.
An Expert Group of 8 European cardiologists with specific expertise across CIED therapy designed and distributed electronically a survey to a number of European Cardiologists.
302 physicians from 18 European countries responded to the survey. 288/302 (95%) physicians agreed that CIED-related infections represent a burden on healthcare resources and are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. 285/302 respondents (94%) primarily assess the risk of CIED infections by only evaluating the patient's clinical profile (137/302, 46%) or with the support of a risk score (148/302, 49%). Intravenous antibiotic prophylaxis is used by 282/302 (93%), followed by the implantation of the lowest number of leads possible (182/302, 60%), and by the use of an antibacterial envelope (173/302, 57%). 230/302 respondents (76%) declared that there is need for clear and concise guidelines and more sensitive risk-scores for CIED infection, to maximize the chances of preventative strategies.
This survey demonstrates a high level of awareness about the multifaceted issue of CIED infection, however, it also highlights an incomplete penetration of scoring systems for risk stratification owing to their perceived limitations, and detects a strong commitment to increase the effectiveness of preventative strategies.
尽管采取了最佳治疗措施,心脏植入式电子设备(CIED)感染仍然会导致显著的死亡率和发病率。本调查旨在了解欧洲临床实践中是否以及如何评估和降低 CIED 感染的风险,以及发现与 EHRA 建议存在差距的地方。
一组由 8 名具有 CIED 治疗专业知识的欧洲心脏病专家组成的专家组,设计并通过电子方式向一些欧洲心脏病专家分发了一项调查。
来自 18 个欧洲国家的 302 名医生对该调查做出了回应。288/302(95%)名医生认为与 CIED 相关的感染对医疗资源构成负担,并且与显著的发病率和死亡率相关。285/302 名受访者(94%)主要通过评估患者的临床特征(137/302,46%)或使用风险评分(148/302,49%)来评估 CIED 感染的风险。282/302(93%)名医生使用静脉内抗生素预防,其次是植入尽可能少的导联(182/302,60%)和使用抗菌信封(173/302,57%)。230/302 名受访者(76%)表示,需要明确和简洁的指南和更敏感的 CIED 感染风险评分,以最大限度地提高预防策略的机会。
这项调查表明,人们对 CIED 感染这一多方面问题的认识水平很高,然而,它也突出了由于对评分系统的局限性的认识,风险分层评分系统的渗透程度不完全,并发现了加强预防策略有效性的强烈意愿。