Leadless pacemaker implant in patients with pre-existing infections: Results from the Micra postapproval registry
- PMID: 30661279
- PMCID: PMC6850680
- DOI: 10.1111/jce.13851
Leadless pacemaker implant in patients with pre-existing infections: Results from the Micra postapproval registry
Abstract
Introduction: Leadless pacemakers may provide a safe and attractive pacing option to patients with cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infection. We describe the characteristics and outcomes of patients with a recent CIED infection undergoing Micra implant attempt.
Methods and results: Patients with prior CIED infection and device explant with Micra implant within 30 days, were identified from the Micra post approval registry. Procedure characteristics and outcomes were summarized. A total of 105 patients with prior CIED infection underwent Micra implant attempt ≤30 days from prior system explant (84 [80%] pacemakers and 13 [12%] ICD/CRT-D). All system components were explanted in 93% of patients and explant occurred a median of 6 days before Micra implant, with 37% occurring on the day of Micra implant. Micra was successfully implanted in 99% patients, mean follow-up duration was 8.5 ± 7.1 months (range 0-28.5). The majority of patients (91%) received IV antibiotics preimplant, while 42% of patients received IV antibiotics postprocedure. The median length of hospitalization following Micra implant was 2 days (IQR, 1-7). During follow-up, two patients died from sepsis and four patients required system upgrade, of which two patients received Micra to provide temporary pacing support. There were no Micra devices explanted due to infection.
Conclusion: Implantation of the Micra transcatheter pacemaker is safe and feasible in patients with a recent CIED infection. No recurrent infections that required Micra device removal were seen. Leadless pacemakers appear to be a safe pacing alternative for patients with CIED infection who undergo extraction.
Keywords: Micra; cardiac implantable electronic device infection; leadless pacemakers; permanent pacing; transcatheter pacemaker.
© 2019 The Authors. Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Figures
References
-
- Voigt A, Shalaby A, Saba S. Continued rise in rates of cardiovascular implantable electronic device infections in the United States: temporal trends and causative insights. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2010;33:414‐419. - PubMed
-
- Cabell CH, Heidenreich PA, Chu VH, et al. Increasing rates of cardiac device infections among medicare beneficiaries: 1990‐1999. Am Heart J. 2004;147:582‐586. - PubMed
-
- Sohail MR, Henrikson CA, Braid‐Forbes MJ, Forbes KF, Lerner DJ. Mortality and cost associated with cardiovascular implantable electronic device infections. Arch Intern Med. 2011;171:1821‐1828. - PubMed
-
- Clémenty N, Carion PL, Léotoing L, et al. Infections and associated costs following cardiovascular implantable electronic device implantations: a nationwide cohort study. Europace. 2018;20:1974‐1980. - PubMed
-
- Tarakji KG, Wazni OM, Harb S, Hsu A, Saliba W, Wilkoff BL. Risk factors for 1‐year mortality among patients with cardiac implantable electronic device infection undergoing transvenous lead extraction: the impact of the infection type and the presence of vegetation on survival. Europace. 2014;16:1490‐1495. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Research Materials