Format

Send to

Choose Destination
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2010 May;21(5):540-4. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8167.2009.01654.x. Epub 2009 Nov 17.

Safety of deferring the reimplantation of pacing systems after their removal for infectious complications in selected patients: a 1-year follow-up study.

Author information

1
D├ępartement de Rythmologie, Clinique Pasteur, Toulouse, France. eloi_marijon@yahoo.fr

Abstract

INTRODUCTION:

Recent expert consensus guidelines mention that one of the principles for infected device replacement following removal is to "reevaluate carefully if there is a continued need for a new cardiac device replacement." This is a Class I recommendation, which nevertheless suffers from a very low level of evidence (level of evidence C), since no study has revisited the systematic practice of reimplanting the same device based on a meticulous clinical reassessment. In the present paper, we examined the safety of withholding the implantation of pacing systems in selected patients.

METHODS AND RESULTS:

Between January 2005 and December 2007, 188 consecutive patients underwent extractions of infected pacing systems at 2 medical centers. "Low-risk" patients were identified by (1) a spontaneous heart rate >45 bpm, (2) no symptomatic asystole during monitoring, (3) QRS duration <120 ms when history of AV block was noted, (4) no high-degree AV block during continuous monitoring. They remained device-free, unless an adverse clinical event occurred mandating the reimplantation. The primary study endpoint was rate of sudden death and syncope after a 12-month follow-up. Among the 74 (39.4%) "low-risk" patients, a single patient suffered a bradycardia-related syncopal event corresponding to a 1.3% (95% CI, 0.0-3.9) rate of primary endpoint. Pacing systems were also reimplanted in 24 patients (32.4%) for syncope (n = 1), nonsevere bradycardia-reated symptoms (n = 17), cardiac resynchronization (n = 2), and for reassurance in 4 asymptomatic patients.

CONCLUSION:

After removal of infected pacing systems, these preliminary data demonstrated that a strategy of nonsystematic device reimplantation associated with close surveillance was safe in "low-risk" patients, allowing the administration of antimicrobials in a device-free state.

[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Wiley
Loading ...
Support Center