Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
Heart Rhythm ; 18(7): 1142-1150, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33781980

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Cardiac device procedures require tissue dissection to free existing device lead(s). Common techniques include blunt dissection, standard electrocautery, and low-temperature electrocautery (PlasmaBlade, Medtronic); however, data on the type of electrosurgical tool used and the development of procedure- or lead-related adverse events are limited. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether standard or low-temperature electrocautery impacts the development of an adverse event. METHODS: We evaluated patients enrolled in WRAP-IT (Worldwide Randomized Antibiotic EnveloPe Infection PrevenTion Trial) undergoing cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) revision, upgrade, or replacement. All adverse events were adjudicated by an independent physician committee. Data were analyzed using Cox proportional hazard regression modeling. RESULTS: In total, 5641 patients underwent device revision/upgrade/replacement. Electrocautery was used in 5205 patients (92.3%) (mean age 70.6 ± 12.7 years; 28.8% female), and low-temperature electrocautery was used in 1866 patients (35.9%). Compared to standard electrocautery, low-temperature electrocautery was associated with a 23% reduction in the incidence of a procedure- or lead-related adverse event through 3 years of follow up (hazard ratio [HR] 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.65-0.91; P = .002). After controlling for the number of active leads, degree of capsulectomy, degree of lead dissection, and renal dysfunction, low-temperature electrocautery was associated with a 32% lower risk of lead-related adverse events (HR 0.68; 95% CI 0.52-0.89; P = .004). These effects were consistent across a spectrum of lead-related adverse event types. CONCLUSION: This study represents one of the largest assessments of electrocautery use in patients undergoing CIED revision, upgrade, or replacement procedures. Compared to standard electrocautery, low-temperature electrocautery significantly reduces adverse effects from these procedures.


Subject(s)
Arrhythmias, Cardiac/therapy , Defibrillators, Implantable/adverse effects , Electrocoagulation/methods , Pacemaker, Artificial/adverse effects , Aged , Device Removal , Equipment Failure , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Retrospective Studies , Temperature
2.
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol ; 13(5): e008280, 2020 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32281393

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Current understanding of the impact of cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infection is based on retrospective analyses from medical records or administrative claims data. The WRAP-IT (Worldwide Randomized Antibiotic Envelope Infection Prevention Trial) offers an opportunity to evaluate the clinical and economic impacts of CIED infection from the hospital, payer, and patient perspectives in the US healthcare system. METHODS: This was a prespecified, as-treated analysis evaluating outcomes related to major CIED infections: mortality, quality of life, disruption of CIED therapy, healthcare utilization, and costs. Payer costs were assigned using medicare fee for service national payments, while medicare advantage, hospital, and patient costs were derived from similar hospital admissions in administrative datasets. RESULTS: Major CIED infection was associated with increased all-cause mortality (12-month risk-adjusted hazard ratio, 3.41 [95% CI, 1.81-6.41]; P<0.001), an effect that sustained beyond 12 months (hazard ratio through all follow-up, 2.30 [95% CI, 1.29-4.07]; P=0.004). Quality of life was reduced (P=0.004) and did not normalize for 6 months. Disruptions in CIED therapy were experienced in 36% of infections for a median duration of 184 days. Mean costs were $55 547±$45 802 for the hospital, $26 867±$14 893, for medicare fee for service and $57 978±$29 431 for Medicare Advantage (mean hospital margin of -$30 828±$39 757 for medicare fee for service and -$6055±$45 033 for medicare advantage). Mean out-of-pocket costs for patients were $2156±$1999 for medicare fee for service, and $1658±$1250 for medicare advantage. CONCLUSIONS: This large, prospective analysis corroborates and extends understanding of the impact of CIED infections as seen in real-world datasets. CIED infections severely impact mortality, quality of life, healthcare utilization, and cost in the US healthcare system. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov Unique Identifier: NCT02277990.


Subject(s)
Anti-Bacterial Agents/economics , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Antibiotic Prophylaxis/economics , Defibrillators, Implantable/economics , Health Care Costs , Health Resources/economics , Pacemaker, Artificial/economics , Prosthesis-Related Infections/economics , Prosthesis-Related Infections/prevention & control , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Anti-Bacterial Agents/adverse effects , Antibiotic Prophylaxis/adverse effects , Cause of Death , Defibrillators, Implantable/adverse effects , Device Removal/economics , Drug Costs , Fee-for-Service Plans/economics , Female , Health Expenditures , Hospital Costs , Humans , Length of Stay/economics , Male , Medicare/economics , Middle Aged , Pacemaker, Artificial/adverse effects , Patient Readmission/economics , Prospective Studies , Prosthesis-Related Infections/microbiology , Prosthesis-Related Infections/mortality , Quality of Life , Single-Blind Method , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome , United States
3.
J Am Coll Cardiol ; 48(8): 1628-33, 2006 Oct 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-17045899

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to determine whether QRS duration or morphology increased the risk of adverse outcome in the DAVID (Dual Chamber and VVI Implantable Defibrillator) trial. BACKGROUND: The DAVID trial found an increased risk of the combined end point of death and new or worsening congestive heart failure (CHF) in defibrillator recipients who were paced DDDR-70 versus VVI-40. METHODS: We analyzed the combined end point in patients with abnormal QRS duration (AbQRS) (> or =110 ms) compared with those with normal QRS duration (NQRS) (<110 ms). RESULTS: The QRS data were available for 496 of the 506 patients enrolled in the trial, including 223 patients with NQRS (45%) and 273 patients with AbQRS (55%). In patients in whom defibrillators were programmed to pace infrequently (VVI-40), having an NQRS or AbQRS was not an indicator of increased risk of adverse outcome. However, among patients in whom defibrillators were programmed in a manner that promoted more frequent ventricular pacing (DDDR-70), there was a significant adverse interaction with AbQRS; this combination was independently associated with a higher risk for developing CHF or death (p = 0.017). CONCLUSIONS: Although patients with AbQRS tended to have other risk factors associated with poor outcome, the interaction of QRS duration with ventricular pacing (DDDR-70) independently contributed to a worse outcome and therefore, was a marker of patients in whom such treatment may be harmful. This should not imply that right ventricular pacing in NQRS patients is safe but rather that pacing in the context of an AbQRS is probably best avoided.


Subject(s)
Cardiac Pacing, Artificial/adverse effects , Defibrillators, Implantable , Heart Conduction System/physiopathology , Heart Failure/etiology , Heart Failure/physiopathology , Cardiac Pacing, Artificial/methods , Disease Progression , Electrocardiography , Heart Ventricles , Humans , Multicenter Studies as Topic , Proportional Hazards Models , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Risk Assessment , Survival Analysis
4.
Am J Cardiol ; 92(6): 740-1, 2003 Sep 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-12972124

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study was to characterize the incidence, time course, frequency, and spectrum of acute and chronic complications arising from dual-chamber pacemaker implantation. This information may serve as a benchmark when comparing complication rates for dual-chamber pacemaker implantation with those for biventricular pacemaker implantation.


Subject(s)
Arrhythmia, Sinus/therapy , Cardiac Pacing, Artificial/adverse effects , Pacemaker, Artificial/adverse effects , Postoperative Complications , Aged , Arrhythmia, Sinus/mortality , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Prospective Studies , Survival Rate , Time Factors
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...