Cardiac implantable electronic devices and bloodstream infections: management and outcomes.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Bloodstream infection (BSI) of any cause may lead to device infection in cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) patients. Aiming for a better understanding of the diagnostic approach, treatment, and outcome, patients with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) and cardiac resynchronization therapy and defibrillator (CRT-D) hospitalized with BSI were investigated. METHODS: This is a single-centre, retrospective, cohort analysis including consecutive ICD/CRT-D patients implanted between 2012 and 2021. These patients were screened against a list of all hospitalized patients having positive blood cultures consistent with diagnosed infection in any department of a local public hospital. RESULTS: The total cohort consisted of 515 patients. Over a median follow-up of 59 months (interquartile range 31-87 months), there were 47 BSI episodes in 36 patients. The majority of patients with BSI (92%) was admitted to non-cardiology units, and in 25 episodes (53%), no cardiac imaging was performed. Nearly all patients (85%) were treated with short-term antibiotics, whereas chronic antibiotic suppression therapy (n = 4) and system extraction (n = 3) were less frequent. Patients with BSI had a nearly seven-fold higher rate (hazard ratio 6.7, 95% confidence interval 3.9-11.2; P < .001) of all-cause mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Diagnostic workup of defibrillator patients with BSI admitted to a non-cardiology unit is often insufficient to characterize lead-related endocarditis. The high mortality rate in these patients with BSI may relate to underdiagnosis and consequently late/absence of system removal. Efforts to increase an interdisciplinary approach and greater use of cardiac imaging are necessary for timely diagnosis and adequate treatment.

Duke Scholars

Author Christopher Bull Granger Medicine, Cardiology