DeSimone, Daniel C

Abstract Background In contrast to bloodstream infection due to a variety of bacteria in patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIED), there are limited data regarding candidemia and risk of CIED infection. Methods All patients with candidemia and a CIED at Mayo Clinic Rochester between 2012 and 2019 were reviewed. Cardiovascular implantable electronic device infection was defined by (1) clinical signs of pocket site infection or (2) echocardiographic evidence of lead vegetations. Results A total of 23 patients with candidemia had underlying CIED; 9 (39.1%) cases were community onset. None of the patients had pocket site infection. The duration between CIED placement and candidemia was prolonged (median 3.5 years; interquartile range, 2.0–6.5). Only 7 (30.4%) patients underwent transesophageal echocardiography and 2 of 7 (28.6%) had lead masses. Only the 2 patients with lead masses underwent CIED extraction, but device cultures were negative for Candida species. Two (33.3%) of 6 other patients who were managed as candidemia without device infection subsequently developed relapsing candidemia. Cardiovascular implantable electronic device removal was done in both patients and device cultures grew Candida species. Although 17.4% of patients were ultimately confirmed to have CIED infection, CIED infection status was undefined in 52.2%. Overall, 17 (73.9%) patients died within 90 days of diagnosis of candidemia. Conclusions Although current international guidelines recommend CIED removal in patients with candidemia, the optimal management strategy remains undefined. This is problematic because candidemia alone is associated with increased morbidity and mortality as seen in this cohort. Moreover, inappropriate device removal or retention can both result in increased patient morbidity and mortality.

Abstract Background Gram-negative bacteremia (GNB) as a manifestation of cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) infection is uncommon. Moreover, echocardiography may be nonspecific in its ability to differentiate whether CIED lead masses are infected. We aimed to determine the rate of CIED infection in the setting of GNB. Methods All patients with CIED who were hospitalized with GNB during 2012–2019 at Mayo Clinic were investigated. The definition of CIED infection was based on criteria recommended by the 2019 European Heart Rhythm Association document. Results A total of 126 patients with CIED developed GNB. None of them had signs of pocket infection. Twenty (15.9%) patients underwent transesophageal echocardiography. Overall, 4 (3%) patients had definite CIED infection. None of them underwent CIED extraction; 3 died within 12 weeks and 1 received long-term antibiotic suppression. Ten (8%) patients had possible CIED infection; despite no CIED extraction, no patient had relapsing GNB. We observed a higher rate of CIED infection in patients with Serratia marcescens bacteremia as compared to that in patients with other GNB. Conclusions The rate of CIED infection following GNB was relatively low. However, accurate classification of CIED infection among patients presenting with GNB remains challenging, in part, due to a case definition of CIED infection that is characterized by a low pretest probability in the setting of GNB. Prospective, multicenter studies are needed to determine accurate identification of CIED infection among GNB, so that only patients with true infection undergo device removal.

AbstractBackgroundThere is insufficient evidence regarding postoperative systemic antibiotic prophylaxis use for more than 24 h following cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIED) implantation and its impact on infection prevention. However, this strategy remains a common practice in many institutions.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review and meta‐analysis including studies that compared the outcomes of patients: (1) who received preoperative plus 24 h or more of postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis (intervention group); and (2) who received either preoperative only or preoperative plus less than 24 h of antibiotic prophylaxis (control group). Risk of bias was assessed with ROBINS‐I and ROB‐2 tools. Risk ratio (RR) was pooled using random‐effect meta‐analyses with inverse variance method.ResultsEight studies that included two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and six cohort studies with a total of 26,187 patients were included in the analysis. Overall, there were no differences in outcomes between the two groups, which included rates of CIED infection (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.42, 1.42), mortality (RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.69, 2.06), pocket hematoma (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.44, 3.00) or reintervention (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.22, 3.46). Of note, the results were primarily impacted by the larger RCT.ConclusionsThere was no benefit of postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis for more than 24 h following CIED implantation in the current systematic review and meta‐analysis. This supports the practice advocated by current guidelines which foster antibiotic stewardship and may result in reductions of adverse drug events, selection for antibiotic resistance, and financial costs of prolonged postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis.

Abstract Background The aim of this study was to determine the incidence, epidemiology, and associated risk factors of bloodstream infection (BSI) in patients who had previously undergone cardiac valve repair. Methods A population-based study that included 7 counties in southeastern Minnesota using the expanded Rochester Epidemiology Project (e-REP) for adults (≥18 years) who underwent valve repair between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2018 was conducted. Electronic health records were screened for development of BSI and infective endocarditis (IE) from the date of valve repair through 30 July 2020. A 1:4 nested case-control analysis was performed to determine an association, if any, of male sex, Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), and county of residence with BSI. Results A total of 335 patients underwent valve repair, of whom 28 (8.3%) developed an index case of BSI, with 14 episodes occurring within 1 year of surgery. The median age of patients with BSI was 70 years, and 79% were male. The crude incidence of BSI was 1671 cases per 100000 person-years and Escherichia coli was the most common pathogen. Case-control analysis demonstrated a significant correlation between CCI and incidence of BSI (P < .001). Only 4 (14.3%) patients developed IE concurrent with the onset of BSI, and no patients developed IE subsequent to BSI. Conclusions The crude incidence of BSI following valve repair was higher in our e-REP cohort than previous population-based studies, and half of the BSI cases occurred within 1 year of surgery. Patients with a higher CCI at baseline were at increased risk of subsequent BSI.

Abstract Background The objective of this paper was to examine temporal changes of infective endocarditis (IE) incidence and epidemiology in North America. Methods A systematic review was conducted at Mayo Clinic, Rochester. Ovid EBM Reviews, Ovid Embase, Ovid Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched for studies published between January 1, 2000, and May 31, 2020. Four referees independently reviewed all studies, and those that reported a population-based incidence of IE in patients aged 18 years and older in North America were included. Results Of 8588 articles screened, 14 were included. Overall, IE incidence remained largely unchanged throughout the study period, except for 2 studies that demonstrated a rise in incidence after 2014. Five studies reported temporal trends of injection drug use (IDU) prevalence among IE patients with a notable increase in prevalence observed. Staphylococcus aureus was the most common pathogen in 7 of 9 studies that included microbiologic findings. In-patient mortality ranged from 3.7% to 14.4%, while the percentage of patients who underwent surgery ranged from 6.4% to 16.0%. Conclusions The overall incidence of IE has remained stable among the 14 population-based investigations in North America identified in our systematic review. Standardization of study design for future population-based investigations has been highlighted for use in subsequent systematic reviews of IE.

AbstractBackgroundOptimal timing of cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) re‐implantation following device removal due to infection is undefined. Multinational guidelines reflect this and include no specific recommendation for this timing, while others have recommended waiting at least 14 days in cases of CIED related infective endocarditis (CIED‐IE). The current work seeks to clarify this issue.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed institutional data at Mayo Clinic, Minnesota of patients aged ≥ 18 years who developed CIED‐IE from January 1, 1991 to February 1, 2016. CIED‐IE was defined as echocardiogram reported device lead or valvular vegetation. Regression analyses were used to relate the risk of clinical outcomes to the interval between CIED removal and re‐implantation and the location of vegetations.ResultsA total of 109 patients met study inclusion criteria. A majority (68.8%) of patients were men and the median age was 68.0 years. Transoesophageal echocardiogram (TEE) was performed in 95.4% of patients, with valve vegetations detected in 33.9% (n = 37). Survival analysis comparing patients in whom device re‐implantation was < 14 days vs. ≥14 days, and further categorized by those with and without valve vegetation, showed a significant difference (P = 0.028); patients with valve vegetation and reimplantation interval < 14 days had the lowest (58.7%) 12‐month survival. When adjusted for valve vegetation, longer time interval for reimplantation trended toward increased hospital length of stay (P = 0.079).ConclusionOur findings suggest that the recommended 14‐day delay between CIED extraction and re‐implantation in CIED‐IE patients is associated with a survival benefit, but longer length of hospital stay following re‐implantation.

AbstractBackgroundThe improved life expectancy observed in patients living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection has made age‐related cardiovascular complications, including arrhythmias, a growing health concern.HypothesisWe describe the temporal trends in frequency of various arrhythmias and assess impact of arrhythmias on hospitalized HIV patients using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS).MethodsData on HIV‐related hospitalizations from 2005 to 2014 were obtained from the NIS database using International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision (ICD‐9) codes. Data was further subclassified into hospitalizations with associated arrhythmias and those without. Baseline demographics and comorbidities were determined. Outcomes including in‐hospital mortality, cost of care, and length of stay were extracted. SAS 9.4 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC) was utilized for analysis. A multivariable analysis was performed to identify predictors of arrhythmias among hospitalized HIV patients.ResultsAmong 2 370 751 HIV‐related hospitalizations identified, the overall frequency of any arrhythmia was 3.01%. Atrial fibrillation (AF) was the most frequent arrhythmia (2110 per 100 000). The overall frequency of arrhythmias increased over time by 108%, primarily due to a 132% increase in AF. Arrhythmias are more frequent among older males, lowest income quartile, and nonelective admissions. Patients with arrhythmias had a higher in‐hospital mortality rate (9.6%). In‐hospital mortality among patients with arrhythmias decreased over time by 43.8%. The cost of care and length of stay associated with arrhythmia‐related hospitalizations were mostly unchanged.ConclusionsArrhythmias are associated with significant morbidity and mortality in hospitalized HIV patients. AF is the most frequent arrhythmia in hospitalized HIV patients.

AbstractBackgroundCulture‐negative (CN) cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) infections represent a significant management challenge for clinicians with no specific guidelines addressing this subgroup of patients. The aim of the current investigation is to report our institutional experience of CN CIED infections and propose a systematic approach to diagnostic evaluation and management of these complicated cases based on our observations.MethodsWe retrospectively screened all CIED infection cases at Mayo Clinic from 2005 through 2017. Using standardized criteria to define significant microbial growth, all patients with positive blood or pocket/device cultures were excluded.ResultsA total of 835 cases of CIED infection were screened, and of these, 47 (6%) met CN‐CIED infection criteria. Majority of patients (77%) in this cohort had received antimicrobial therapy prior to device cultures with a median duration of 8 days. The most common presentation was device pocket infection (81%). All patients underwent device removal. Route of antibiotics was switched from oral to parenteral and spectrum of activity expanded from initial therapy in 23% of patients despite negative cultures. Majority of patients (80%) were dismissed on parenteral therapy. Adverse events attributed to intravenous antibiotic therapy were documented in 63% of the cases. No recurrence was reported and 6‐month survival was 94.8%.ConclusionsPocket and device cultures in suspected CIED infections may be negative due to preextraction oral antibiotics. However, frequently these patients are managed with broad‐spectrum parenteral therapy postextraction.

AbstractBackgroundCardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) can be life‐saving. However, complications from CIED infection can be life‐threatening, often requiring device removal. Despite publication of CIED infection management guidelines, there remains marked variation in clinical practice.ObjectiveTo better understand and quantify these differences, we conducted a multinational survey of practitioners of CIED management.MethodsAn electronic survey was sent to Heart Rhythm Society members, spanning 70 countries across six continents. All responses were collected anonymously.Results227 out of 3,600 (6.3%) responded to the survey. The majority of surveys were completed by practitioners from the United States (168; 68.3%) and 53.8% of these practiced in academic medical centers. The large majority (92.7%) of sites had protocols to ensure appropriate timing of prophylactic antibiotics. Superficial (incisional) site infections were treated with antibiotics alone 52.5% of the time (consistent with guidelines); in contrast, deep pocket infections were treated with antibiotics (with device removal) in accordance to guidelines only 37.4% of the time. Almost all providers (98.7%) were inclined to perform complete hardware removal in cases of CIED‐related endocarditis. In contrast, 82.2% of survey participants suggested complete CIED system removal in patients with an occult Gram‐positive bacteremia, 65.5% with occult Gram‐negative bacteremia, and 59.3% with prolonged bacteremia due to a source other than CIED.ConclusionsThese data suggest wide variability in clinical practice in managing CIED infection with significant deviations from published guidelines. There is critical need to increase awareness and develop institutional protocols to ensure adherence with evidence‐based guidelines to optimize outcomes.