Donate Help Contact The AHA Sign In Home
American Heart Association
Circulation
Search: search_blue_button Advanced Search
Circulation. 2007;116:1349-1355
Published online before print August 27, 2007, doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.678664
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow CME: Take the course for this article:
Circulation: September 18, 2007, Volume 116, Number 12
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
116/12/1349    most recent
CIRCULATIONAHA.106.678664v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Klug, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Klug, D.
Right arrowPubmed/NCBI databases
Medline Plus Health Information
*Endocarditis
*Pacemakers and Implantable Defibrillators
Related Collections
Right arrow Pacemaker
Right arrow Ablation/ICD/surgery

(Circulation. 2007;116:1349-1355.)
© 2007 American Heart Association, Inc.


Arrhythmia/Electrophysiology

Risk Factors Related to Infections of Implanted Pacemakers and Cardioverter-Defibrillators

Results of a Large Prospective Study

Didier Klug, MD, PhD; Mamadou Balde, MD; Dominique Pavin, MD; Françoise Hidden-Lucet, MD; Jacques Clementy, MD; Nicolas Sadoul, MD; Jean Luc Rey, MD; Gilles Lande, MD; Arnaud Lazarus, MD; Jacques Victor, MD; Claude Barnay, MD; Bruno Grandbastien, MD; Salem Kacet, MD, for the PEOPLE Study Group

From Hôpital Cardiologique de Lille, Lille (D.K., S.K.); Département d’épidémiologie Université de Lille, Lille (M.B., B.G.); Hôpital Cardio-Pneumologique de Rennes, Rennes (D.P.); Hôpital la Pitié-Salpétrière, APHP, Paris (F.H.-L.); Hôpital Cardiologique du Haut-Lévêque, Bordeaux (J.C.); Hôpital de Brabois, Vandoeuvre-lès-Nancy (N.S.); Centre Hospitalier Universitaire d’Amiens, Amiens (J.L.R.); Hôpital Guillaume et René Laennec, Nantes (G.L.); Clinique Bizet, Paris (A.L.); Hôpital Universitaire d’Angers, Angers (J.V.); and Centre Hospitalier du pays d’Aix, Aix en Provence (C.B.), France.

Reprint requests to Didier Klug, MD, Department of Cardiology A, Hôpital Cardiologique de Lille, CHRU, 59037, Lille Cedex, France. E-mail dklug{at}chru-lille.fr

Received December 1, 2006; accepted June 25, 2007.

Background— The Prospective Evaluation of Pacemaker Lead Endocarditis study is a multicenter, prospective survey of the incidence and risk factors of infectious complications after implantation of pacemakers and cardioverter-defibrillators.

Methods and Results— Between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2000, 6319 consecutive recipients of implantable systems were enrolled at 44 medical centers and followed up for 12 months. All infectious complications were recorded, and their occurrence was related to the baseline demographic, clinical, and procedural characteristics. Among 5866 pacing systems, 3789 included 2 and 117 had >2 leads; among 453 implantable cardioverter-defibrillators, 178 were dual-lead systems. A total of 4461 de novo implantations occurred and 1858 pulse generator or lead replacements. Reinterventions were performed before hospital discharge in 101 patients. Single- and multiple-variable logistic regression analyses were performed to identify risk factors; adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. At 12 months, device-related infections were reported in 42 patients (0.68%; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.89). The occurrence of infection was positively correlated with fever within 24 hours before the implantation procedure (aOR, 5.83; 95% CI, 2.00 to 16.98), use of temporary pacing before the implantation procedure (aOR, 2.46; 95% CI, 1.09 to 5.13), and early reinterventions (aOR, 15.04; 95% CI, 6.7 to 33.73). Implantation of a new system (aOR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.87) and antibiotic prophylaxis (aOR, 0.4; 95% CI, 0.18 to 0.86) were negatively correlated with risk of infection.

Conclusions— This study identified several factors of risk of device infection and confirmed the efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis in recipients of new or replacement pacemakers or implantable cardioverter-defibrillators.


 

CLINICAL PERSPECTIVE




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
EuropaceHome page
B. Nuta
Concerns about the long-term outcome of transseptal cardiac resynchronization therapy: what we have learned from surgical experience: reply
Europace, January 1, 2008; 10(1): 122 - 123.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
EuropaceHome page
I. Kassai and T. Szili-Torok
Concerns about the long-term outcome of transseptal cardiac resynchronization therapy: what we have learned from surgical experience
Europace, January 1, 2008; 10(1): 121 - 122.
[Full Text] [PDF]