Mounsey J P, Griffith M J, Tynan M, Gould F K, MacDermott A F, Gold R G, Bexton R S
Department of Cardiology, Northern Regional Cardiothoracic Centre Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne.
Br Heart J. 1994 Oct;72(4):339-43. doi: 10.1136/hrt.72.4.339.
Pacemaker pocket infection is a potentially serious problem after permanent pacemaker implantation. Antibiotic prophylaxis is commonly prescribed to reduce the incidence of this complication, but current trial evidence of its efficacy is conflicting. A large prospective randomised trial was therefore performed of antibiotic prophylaxis in permanent pacemaker implantation. The intention was firstly to determine whether antibiotic prophylaxis is efficacious in these patients and secondly to identify which patients are at the highest risk of infection.
A prospective randomised open trial of flucloxacillin (clindamycin if the patient was allergic to penicillin) v no antibiotic was performed in a cohort of patients undergoing first implantation of a permanent pacing system over a 17 month period. Intravenous antibiotics were started at the time of implantation and continued for 48 hours. The trial endpoint was a repeat operation for an infective complication.
473 patients were entered into a randomised trial. 224 received antibiotic prophylaxis and 249 received no antibiotics. A further 183 patients were not randomised but were treated according to the operator's preference (64 antibiotics, 119 no antibiotics); these patients are included only in the analysis of predictors of infection. Patients were followed up for a mean (SD) of 19(5) months. Among the patients in the randomised group there were nine infections requiring a repeat operation, all in the group not receiving antibiotic (P = 0.003). In the total patient cohort there were 13 infections, all but one in the non-antibiotic group (P = 0.006). Nine of the infections presented as erosion of the pulse generator or electrode, three as septicaemia secondary to Staphylococcus aureus, and one as a pocket abscess secondary to Staphylococcus epidermidis. Infections were significantly more common when the operator was inexperienced (< or = 100 previous patients), the operation was prolonged, or after a repeat operation for non-infective complications (principally lead displacement). Infection was not significantly more common in patients identified preoperatively as being at high risk (for example patients with diabetes mellitus, patients receiving long term steroid treatment), although there was a trend in this direction.
Antibiotic prophylaxis significantly reduced the incidence of infective complications requiring a repeat operation after permanent pacemaker implantation. It is suggested that antibiotics should be used routinely.
永久起搏器植入术后,起搏器囊袋感染是一个潜在的严重问题。通常会预防性使用抗生素以降低这种并发症的发生率,但目前关于其疗效的试验证据相互矛盾。因此,开展了一项关于永久起搏器植入术中抗生素预防的大型前瞻性随机试验。目的一是确定抗生素预防对这些患者是否有效,二是确定哪些患者感染风险最高。
在一组接受首次永久起搏系统植入的患者中,进行了一项前瞻性随机开放试验,比较氟氯西林(若患者对青霉素过敏则用克林霉素)与不使用抗生素的效果。静脉抗生素在植入时开始使用,并持续48小时。试验终点是因感染性并发症而进行的再次手术。
473例患者进入随机试验。224例接受抗生素预防,249例未接受抗生素。另有183例患者未随机分组,而是根据术者偏好进行治疗(64例使用抗生素,119例未使用抗生素);这些患者仅纳入感染预测因素分析。患者平均随访19(5)个月。在随机分组的患者中,有9例感染需要再次手术,均在未接受抗生素的组中(P = 0.003)。在整个患者队列中,有13例感染,除1例外在非抗生素组中(P = 0.006)。9例感染表现为脉冲发生器或电极侵蚀,3例为金黄色葡萄球菌继发败血症所致,1例为表皮葡萄球菌继发囊袋脓肿。当术者经验不足(既往手术患者≤100例)、手术时间延长或因非感染性并发症(主要是导线移位)进行再次手术后,感染明显更常见。术前被确定为高危患者(如糖尿病患者、接受长期类固醇治疗的患者)感染虽有增加趋势,但差异无统计学意义。
抗生素预防显著降低了永久起搏器植入术后因感染性并发症而需再次手术的发生率。建议常规使用抗生素。