Cargando…

Is There Always a Need for Permanent Pacemaker Replacement After Device Infection? A Tale of Two Patients

There has been an increase in number of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) implantation and with this we have witnessed increased rates of CIED infection mainly in elderly population. It is important to assess conditions that may not reliably improve with cardiac pacing or those who lack...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sharma, Munish, Mascarenhas, Daniel A.N.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elmer Press 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5942244/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29755632
http://dx.doi.org/10.14740/cr657w
Descripción
Sumario:There has been an increase in number of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) implantation and with this we have witnessed increased rates of CIED infection mainly in elderly population. It is important to assess conditions that may not reliably improve with cardiac pacing or those who lack adequate beneficial effect from permanent pacing before contemplating implantation or reimplantation of these devices. Sometimes, the initial cardiac pathology may revert obviating the need for reimplantation as in the two cases that we have discussed below. This reduces the chance of further infection of CIED, and decreases mortality and morbidity due to recurrent CIED infection and decreases cost of care.