Impact of hospital lead extraction volume on management of cardiac implantable electronic device-associated infective endocarditis.

AIMS: Utilization of transvenous lead extraction/removal (TLE) for the management of cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED)-associated infective endocarditis (IE) remains low. The aim of this study was to examine the impact of hospital TLE procedural volume on TLE utilization and outcomes for patients with CIED-associated IE.

METHODS AND

RESULTS

Using the Nationwide Readmissions Database, we evaluated 21 545 admissions for patients (mean age 70 years, 39% female) with CIEDs hospitalized with IE at TLE centres. Hospitals were categorized based on annual volume tertiles: (i) low-volume (1-17 TLEs/year), (ii) medium-volume (18-45 TLEs/year), and (iii) high-volume centres (>45 TLEs/year). Between 2016 and 2019, 57% of admissions in the study were to low-volume TLE centres. Transvenous lead extraction/removal was performed during 6.9, 19.3, and 26% of admissions for CIED-associated IE at low-, medium-, and high-volume TLE centres, respectively (P < 0.001). After adjustment for age and comorbidities, hospitalization for IE at high-volume centres was independently associated with TLE when compared with low-volume centres (adjusted odds ratio 4.26; 95% confidence interval 3.53-5.15). Transvenous lead extraction/removal-associated complication rates were similar at 2.5, 2.3, and 3.4% at low-, medium-, and high-volume centres, respectively (P = 0.493). Overall inpatient mortality during admissions to low-, medium-, and high-volume centres was also similar.

CONCLUSION

Admissions to high-volume TLE centres were associated with higher utilization of TLE for management of CIED-associated IE. Transvenous lead extraction/removal-associated complications and mortality among patients hospitalized with CIED-associated IE were similar when stratified by hospital TLE volume, but this needs to be considered in context of significant differences in patient comorbidity burden between centres.