Journal of Ayub Medical College, Abbottabad : JAMC · 2020
Infection Of Permanent Pacemaker's Pocket, What Do We Do?
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Shah Bakhtawar, Hussain Cheragh
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: With increased rate of permanent pacemaker's (PPM) implantation, the rate of complication also increased many folds. Infection in pacemakers is one of the dreaded complications which need a multidisciplinary approach in its management.
METHODS: All patients with permanent pacemakers, who presented with infection of device, were admitted in our unit. The infected device was explanted and wound left open. The same device was used as a temporary pacemaker with a new PPM screwing lead from internal jugular approach. Once the infection was under control, a new device was implanted on the other side and temporary wire (PPM screwing lead) pulled out. Wound on both side closed and patient kept on antibiotics for a week.
RESULTS: Total 10 cases of infected device received. Single chambers devices with infection were six and dual chamber pacemakers were four. One case with infection had tine lead and nine patients presented with screwing leads. Male and female ratio was 2.3:1. All leads were explanted in our department with conventional gadgets using rotation and traction maneuvers. Culture sensitivity in all cases remained negative. Patients were kept on broad spectrum antibiotics till the wound was clear. One patient had small pericardial effusion soon after explantation of tine lead, which was treated conservatively. No other major or minor complication documented..
CONCLUSIONS: Scrupulous planning and preparation before system extraction and later on new Cardiac implantable electronic device re-implantation is essential for better patient outcome.
METHODS: All patients with permanent pacemakers, who presented with infection of device, were admitted in our unit. The infected device was explanted and wound left open. The same device was used as a temporary pacemaker with a new PPM screwing lead from internal jugular approach. Once the infection was under control, a new device was implanted on the other side and temporary wire (PPM screwing lead) pulled out. Wound on both side closed and patient kept on antibiotics for a week.
RESULTS: Total 10 cases of infected device received. Single chambers devices with infection were six and dual chamber pacemakers were four. One case with infection had tine lead and nine patients presented with screwing leads. Male and female ratio was 2.3:1. All leads were explanted in our department with conventional gadgets using rotation and traction maneuvers. Culture sensitivity in all cases remained negative. Patients were kept on broad spectrum antibiotics till the wound was clear. One patient had small pericardial effusion soon after explantation of tine lead, which was treated conservatively. No other major or minor complication documented..
CONCLUSIONS: Scrupulous planning and preparation before system extraction and later on new Cardiac implantable electronic device re-implantation is essential for better patient outcome.