ArticlePostepy w kardiologii interwencyjnej = Advances in interventional cardiology2022
Long-term results of conservative treatment of pacemaker pocket site infections.
Article in Postepy w kardiologii interwencyjnej = Advances in interventional cardiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Long-term survival with pocket-defected permanent pacemaker after conservative management of pacemaker infection.HeartRhythm case reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The increasing frequency of cardiac device use has led to an increase in complication rates. The standard treatment for cardiac device-related infections is removal of the entire pacemaker system and reimplantation from the contralateral side after systemic antibiotherapy. The efficacy of various conservative treatments has been established for many years, but there is conflicting information in the literature regarding long-term efficacy. Aim: Our study investigated the long-term efficacy of conservative treatment in patients with pacemaker pocket site infection. Material and methods: In this retrospective study, according to the exclusion criteria, 132 patients were included. Patients were divided into conservative and standard treatment groups. Conservative treatment was considered to be opening the pacemaker pocket capsule, removing all infected and necrotic tissue, cleaning the capsule, and embedding the battery in the prepectoral region in the subpectoral muscle region. Results: The follow-up time was 36 ±12.96 months in the conservative treatment group and 39.6 ±10.8 months in the standard treatment group. During this period, no re-infection at the pacemaker pocket site was observed in either group. Examination of the swab cultures of the patients' pacemaker wounds revealed negative culture results in 15 patients (15 out of 60) in the conservative treatment group. In the standard treatment group, 60 patients (60 out of 72) were culture-negative. This difference was statistically significant ( Conclusions: After a rigorous evaluation, conservative treatment is considered effective and safe in the long term in patients with device pocket site infection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.