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
_version_ 1783321432650940416
author Sharma, Munish
Mascarenhas, Daniel A.N.
author_facet Sharma, Munish
Mascarenhas, Daniel A.N.
author_sort Sharma, Munish
collection PubMed
description 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5942244
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Elmer Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-59422442018-05-11 Is There Always a Need for Permanent Pacemaker Replacement After Device Infection? A Tale of Two Patients Sharma, Munish Mascarenhas, Daniel A.N. Cardiol Res Case Report 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. Elmer Press 2018-04 2018-04-25 /pmc/articles/PMC5942244/ /pubmed/29755632 http://dx.doi.org/10.14740/cr657w Text en Copyright 2018, Sharma et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial 4.0 International License, which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Case Report
Sharma, Munish
Mascarenhas, Daniel A.N.
Is There Always a Need for Permanent Pacemaker Replacement After Device Infection? A Tale of Two Patients
title Is There Always a Need for Permanent Pacemaker Replacement After Device Infection? A Tale of Two Patients
title_full Is There Always a Need for Permanent Pacemaker Replacement After Device Infection? A Tale of Two Patients
title_fullStr Is There Always a Need for Permanent Pacemaker Replacement After Device Infection? A Tale of Two Patients
title_full_unstemmed Is There Always a Need for Permanent Pacemaker Replacement After Device Infection? A Tale of Two Patients
title_short Is There Always a Need for Permanent Pacemaker Replacement After Device Infection? A Tale of Two Patients
title_sort is there always a need for permanent pacemaker replacement after device infection? a tale of two patients
topic Case Report
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5942244/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29755632
http://dx.doi.org/10.14740/cr657w
work_keys_str_mv AT sharmamunish istherealwaysaneedforpermanentpacemakerreplacementafterdeviceinfectionataleoftwopatients
AT mascarenhasdanielan istherealwaysaneedforpermanentpacemakerreplacementafterdeviceinfectionataleoftwopatients