ArticleClinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society2024
Microbial growth on temporary pacemaker leads post-TAVR: pathogen spectrum and clinical implications.
Article in Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveTranscatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is an established treatment option for patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis across all stages of surgical risk. Rapid pacing during the procedure and the risk for the occurrence of conduction disturbances after TAVR requires the pre-interventional insertion of a temporary pacemaker (TP). However, this approach poses risks, including the risk of infection. For this reason, the following study aimed to investigate microbial growth on temporary pacemaker leads and its association with outcome post-TAVR and to identify associated pathogens and related risk factors.
methodsA prospective study was conducted including 344 patients undergoing TAVR at the Heart Centre Bonn. Of these, 97 patients did not require TP leads as they already had permanent pacemakers; this group was considered as comparison group. The TP leads of the remaining 247 patients were removed, sonicated, and cultured to investigate bacterial growth over a period of 14 days. Finally, we compared patients without microbial growth (n = 184) and patients with microbial growth (n = 63). The primary endpoint of the study was 30-day all-cause mortality, secondary endpoints were periprocedural infections, the length of the postprocedural hospital stay, 30-day major vascular complications and the 30-day stroke rate.
resultsThe majority of cases (74.5%) showed no bacterial growth. In the remaining cases (25.5%), diverse microorganisms were identified, mostly non-pathogenic bacteria. The statistical analysis revealed no significant differences between groups according to microbial growth in terms of 30-day mortality (p = 0.446), postprocedural hospital stay (p = 0.401), periprocedural infections (p = 0.434), 30-day major vascular complications (p = 1.0), and 30-day stroke rate (p = 1.0). Notably, the timing of sheath insertion was significantly associated with microbial growth; sheath placement more than 2 days prior to the procedure was associated with a significantly higher risk of microbial growth (OR: 2.1; 95% CI 1.1-4.3) (p = 0.030).
conclusionsThe presence of temporary leads does not significantly impact clinical outcomes, irrespective of bacterial growth on the lead. However, the timing and duration of sheath placement plays a crucial role in contamination incidence. Thus, temporary leads/sheaths should be placed shortly before the procedure and removed promptly to reduce the risk of contamination/infection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39256220What 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.