Post-cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices: Inflammation of the Pocket. Should We Be More Aggressive?

BACKGROUND

Pacemaker pocket early post-implantation inflammation (EPII) is defined as clinical signs of local erythema without any systemic signs of infection occurring early after implantation. Data on the best treatment regimen for apparent superficial EPII is scarce.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the prognostic value of medical treatment, rather than extraction surgery, in patients with EPII.

METHODS

Data from 6013 consecutive patients who underwent cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation or replacement from 2007-2015 were retrospectively analyzed; 40 (0.7%) presented with EPII. Our goal was the absence of major complications and to avoidance of extraction.

RESULTS

Patients with EPII were initially treated medically. Nineteen (47%) (group A) recovered with antibiotic treatment only. In the other 21 patients (53%) (group B), CIED extraction was performed. Group B had more major complications compared to group A (15 [71%] vs. 0 [0%], P < 0.001). The only significant difference in baseline characteristics was history of non-initial procedure. While 86% of group B patients had a previous non-initial procedure, only 53% of group A patients underwent previous replacement (P < 0.05). In multivariate analysis, previous non-initial procedure was the only predictor for need of extraction at 1 year, hazard ratio 3.5, 95% confidence interval 1.001-11.73, P < 0.05.

CONCLUSIONS

Conservative treatment in patients with EPII after non-initial procedure can lead to serious adverse events resulting in the need for extraction. Close follow-up and aggressive treatment should be considered early in the therapeutic course.