Conference Coverage

Cardiac implantable device infection rate is falling


 

AT HEART RHYTHM 2013

DENVER – Whether cardiac electronic devices are implanted in an inpatient or outpatient setting doesn’t affect device infection rates, according to a national analysis of Medicare data for 1997-2010.

Outpatient implantations are on the upswing. From 1997 to 2010, the proportion of pacemaker implantations performed in Medicare patients on an outpatient basis climbed from 8.6% to 29%. In addition, the proportion of pacemaker revision procedures done in outpatient settings nearly doubled, from 37% to 72%, Dr. Arnold J. Greenspon reported at the annual meeting of the Heart Rhythm Society.

Dr. Arnold Greenspon

Similarly, outpatient installation of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) accounted for just 6.2% of all ICD implantations in 1997, but 36% in 2010. The proportion of ICD revision procedures performed on an outpatient basis rose from 31% to 69% during this time period, added Dr. Greenspon, professor of medicine and director of the cardiac electrophysiology laboratory at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia.

Device infection rates following primary implantation have been waning. The ICD infection rate dropped from 1.3% in 1997 to 0.8% in 2010. Pacemaker infections are less frequent: The rate was 0.9% in 1997, falling to just 0.2% in 2010.

However, the risk of deep infection warranting inpatient revision surgery has increased over time. The annual number of patients undergoing inpatient device removal on the basis of ICD diagnosis codes for deep infection or sepsis increased two- to -threefold during 1997-2010.

Risk factors for infection identified in this study included advanced age, renal failure and other medical comorbidities, and an increasing number of cardiac device procedures. Indeed, the pacemaker and ICD infection rates climbed to 14% and 9%, respectively, in patients who had undergone five device procedures.

This study was funded by Medtronic. Dr. Greenspon reported serving as a consultant to Medtronic, Boston Scientific, and St. Jude Medical.

bjancin@frontlinemedcom.com

Recommended Reading

Less aggressive anticoagulation appears safe after high-risk aortic valve replacement
MDedge Cardiology
Single-chamber ICDs better when pacing isn't required
MDedge Cardiology
Antitachycardia pacing in ICDs linked to higher mortality
MDedge Cardiology
Biventricular pacing bests conventional tx in BLOCK HF trial
MDedge Cardiology
BRUISE CONTROL: Continue warfarin during cardiac device surgery
MDedge Cardiology
Upcoming guidelines on inherited arrhythmias contain surprises
MDedge Cardiology
DECAAF points way to improved AF ablation
MDedge Cardiology
Renal dysfunction improved after AF ablation
MDedge Cardiology
Watchman device hits home run in PROTECT AF trial
MDedge Cardiology
Leadless cardiac pacemaker draws plaudits
MDedge Cardiology