Use of antimicrobial agent pocket irrigation for cardiovascular implantable electronic device infection prophylaxis

Results from an international survey

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: Survey the usage and application protocol of antimicrobial agent pocket irrigation for cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) infection prophylaxis. Background: Local antibiotic usage for CIED infection prophylaxis, in particular pocket irrigation, is a well-known strategy but with little data on its clinical effectiveness. Methods: An anonymous voluntary online survey was sent to a total of 2,092 arrhythmia-oriented cardiologists in 51 countries (1,490 from the United States). Results: There were 487 responses (response rate 23.3%: U.S. 28.2%, outside of the U.S. 11.1%). Eighty-seven percent of respondents use intraoperative antimicrobial agent pocket irrigation and/or an antimicrobial eluting pouch to reduce CIED infection. Fifty-four percent of respondents believe that it is effective to use an antimicrobial agent pocket irrigation to reduce CIED infection; 33% of respondents are uncertain; a few consider this strategy ineffective (13%) or offered no opinion. Significant differences exist in the practice patterns and beliefs between the U.S. and non-U.S. countries (P < 0.05). Ninety-eight percent of respondents report using the same pocket irrigation protocol for permanent pacemaker versus implantable cardioverter defibrillator. Bacitracin (48%), vancomycin (39%), and a cephalosporin (29%) are the most commonly chosen antibiotics. A majority of the respondents are unaware of the cost of using antimicrobial agent pocket irrigation (69%) and neither are they concerned (67%). Conclusion: This international survey suggests that, while there are little clinical data to support or discourage such practice, the usage of antimicrobial agent pocket irrigation for CIED infection prophylaxis is widely used in current practice.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1298-1306
Number of pages9
JournalPACE - Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology
Volume41
Issue number10
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 1 2018

Fingerprint

Anti-Infective Agents
Equipment and Supplies
Infection
Anti-Bacterial Agents
Bacitracin
Implantable Defibrillators
Cephalosporins
Vancomycin
Surveys and Questionnaires
Cardiac Arrhythmias
Costs and Cost Analysis

Keywords

  • cardiovascular implantable electronic device
  • infection
  • pocket irrigation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

@article{685728ff5f204a338d9009bdaf17a7e2,
title = "Use of antimicrobial agent pocket irrigation for cardiovascular implantable electronic device infection prophylaxis: Results from an international survey",
abstract = "Purpose: Survey the usage and application protocol of antimicrobial agent pocket irrigation for cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) infection prophylaxis. Background: Local antibiotic usage for CIED infection prophylaxis, in particular pocket irrigation, is a well-known strategy but with little data on its clinical effectiveness. Methods: An anonymous voluntary online survey was sent to a total of 2,092 arrhythmia-oriented cardiologists in 51 countries (1,490 from the United States). Results: There were 487 responses (response rate 23.3{\%}: U.S. 28.2{\%}, outside of the U.S. 11.1{\%}). Eighty-seven percent of respondents use intraoperative antimicrobial agent pocket irrigation and/or an antimicrobial eluting pouch to reduce CIED infection. Fifty-four percent of respondents believe that it is effective to use an antimicrobial agent pocket irrigation to reduce CIED infection; 33{\%} of respondents are uncertain; a few consider this strategy ineffective (13{\%}) or offered no opinion. Significant differences exist in the practice patterns and beliefs between the U.S. and non-U.S. countries (P < 0.05). Ninety-eight percent of respondents report using the same pocket irrigation protocol for permanent pacemaker versus implantable cardioverter defibrillator. Bacitracin (48{\%}), vancomycin (39{\%}), and a cephalosporin (29{\%}) are the most commonly chosen antibiotics. A majority of the respondents are unaware of the cost of using antimicrobial agent pocket irrigation (69{\%}) and neither are they concerned (67{\%}). Conclusion: This international survey suggests that, while there are little clinical data to support or discourage such practice, the usage of antimicrobial agent pocket irrigation for CIED infection prophylaxis is widely used in current practice.",
keywords = "cardiovascular implantable electronic device, infection, pocket irrigation",
author = "Qi Zheng and {Di Biase}, Luigi and Ferrick, {Kevin J.} and Gross, {Jay N.} and Guttenplan, {Nils A.} and Kim, {Soo G.} and Krumerman, {Andrew K.} and Palma, {Eugen C.} and Fisher, {John Devens}",
year = "2018",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/pace.13473",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "41",
pages = "1298--1306",
journal = "PACE - Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology",
issn = "0147-8389",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "10",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Use of antimicrobial agent pocket irrigation for cardiovascular implantable electronic device infection prophylaxis

T2 - Results from an international survey

AU - Zheng, Qi

AU - Di Biase, Luigi

AU - Ferrick, Kevin J.

AU - Gross, Jay N.

AU - Guttenplan, Nils A.

AU - Kim, Soo G.

AU - Krumerman, Andrew K.

AU - Palma, Eugen C.

AU - Fisher, John Devens

PY - 2018/10/1

Y1 - 2018/10/1

N2 - Purpose: Survey the usage and application protocol of antimicrobial agent pocket irrigation for cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) infection prophylaxis. Background: Local antibiotic usage for CIED infection prophylaxis, in particular pocket irrigation, is a well-known strategy but with little data on its clinical effectiveness. Methods: An anonymous voluntary online survey was sent to a total of 2,092 arrhythmia-oriented cardiologists in 51 countries (1,490 from the United States). Results: There were 487 responses (response rate 23.3%: U.S. 28.2%, outside of the U.S. 11.1%). Eighty-seven percent of respondents use intraoperative antimicrobial agent pocket irrigation and/or an antimicrobial eluting pouch to reduce CIED infection. Fifty-four percent of respondents believe that it is effective to use an antimicrobial agent pocket irrigation to reduce CIED infection; 33% of respondents are uncertain; a few consider this strategy ineffective (13%) or offered no opinion. Significant differences exist in the practice patterns and beliefs between the U.S. and non-U.S. countries (P < 0.05). Ninety-eight percent of respondents report using the same pocket irrigation protocol for permanent pacemaker versus implantable cardioverter defibrillator. Bacitracin (48%), vancomycin (39%), and a cephalosporin (29%) are the most commonly chosen antibiotics. A majority of the respondents are unaware of the cost of using antimicrobial agent pocket irrigation (69%) and neither are they concerned (67%). Conclusion: This international survey suggests that, while there are little clinical data to support or discourage such practice, the usage of antimicrobial agent pocket irrigation for CIED infection prophylaxis is widely used in current practice.

AB - Purpose: Survey the usage and application protocol of antimicrobial agent pocket irrigation for cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) infection prophylaxis. Background: Local antibiotic usage for CIED infection prophylaxis, in particular pocket irrigation, is a well-known strategy but with little data on its clinical effectiveness. Methods: An anonymous voluntary online survey was sent to a total of 2,092 arrhythmia-oriented cardiologists in 51 countries (1,490 from the United States). Results: There were 487 responses (response rate 23.3%: U.S. 28.2%, outside of the U.S. 11.1%). Eighty-seven percent of respondents use intraoperative antimicrobial agent pocket irrigation and/or an antimicrobial eluting pouch to reduce CIED infection. Fifty-four percent of respondents believe that it is effective to use an antimicrobial agent pocket irrigation to reduce CIED infection; 33% of respondents are uncertain; a few consider this strategy ineffective (13%) or offered no opinion. Significant differences exist in the practice patterns and beliefs between the U.S. and non-U.S. countries (P < 0.05). Ninety-eight percent of respondents report using the same pocket irrigation protocol for permanent pacemaker versus implantable cardioverter defibrillator. Bacitracin (48%), vancomycin (39%), and a cephalosporin (29%) are the most commonly chosen antibiotics. A majority of the respondents are unaware of the cost of using antimicrobial agent pocket irrigation (69%) and neither are they concerned (67%). Conclusion: This international survey suggests that, while there are little clinical data to support or discourage such practice, the usage of antimicrobial agent pocket irrigation for CIED infection prophylaxis is widely used in current practice.

KW - cardiovascular implantable electronic device

KW - infection

KW - pocket irrigation

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85053282942&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85053282942&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/pace.13473

DO - 10.1111/pace.13473

M3 - Article

VL - 41

SP - 1298

EP - 1306

JO - PACE - Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology

JF - PACE - Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology

SN - 0147-8389

IS - 10

ER -