Cargando…

Impact of Choice of Prophylaxis on the Microbiology of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Infections: Insights From the Prevention of Arrhythmia Device Infection Trial (PADIT)

BACKGROUND: The Prevention of Arrhythmia Device Infection Trial (PADIT) investigated whether intensification of perioperative prophylaxis could prevent cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infections. Compared with a single dose of cefazolin, the perioperative administration of cefazolin, va...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Longtin, Yves, Gervais, Philippe, Birnie, David H, Wang, Jia, Alings, Marco, Philippon, François, Parkash, Ratika, Manlucu, Jaimie, Angaran, Paul, Rinne, Claus, Coutu, Benoit, Low, R Aaron, Essebag, Vidal, Morillo, Carlos, Redfearn, Damian, Toal, Satish, Becker, Giuliano, Degrâce, Michel, Thibault, Bernard, Crystal, Eugene, Tung, Stanley, LeMaitre, John, Sultan, Omar, Bennett, Matthew, Bashir, Jamil, Ayala-Paredes, Felix, Rioux, Leon, Hemels, Martin E W, Bouwels, Leon H R, Exner, Derek V, Dorian, Paul, Connolly, Stuart J, Krahn, Andrew D
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8632784/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34859113
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofab513
_version_ 1784607816802107392
author Longtin, Yves
Gervais, Philippe
Birnie, David H
Wang, Jia
Alings, Marco
Philippon, François
Parkash, Ratika
Manlucu, Jaimie
Angaran, Paul
Rinne, Claus
Coutu, Benoit
Low, R Aaron
Essebag, Vidal
Morillo, Carlos
Redfearn, Damian
Toal, Satish
Becker, Giuliano
Degrâce, Michel
Thibault, Bernard
Crystal, Eugene
Tung, Stanley
LeMaitre, John
Sultan, Omar
Bennett, Matthew
Bashir, Jamil
Ayala-Paredes, Felix
Rioux, Leon
Hemels, Martin E W
Bouwels, Leon H R
Exner, Derek V
Dorian, Paul
Connolly, Stuart J
Krahn, Andrew D
author_facet Longtin, Yves
Gervais, Philippe
Birnie, David H
Wang, Jia
Alings, Marco
Philippon, François
Parkash, Ratika
Manlucu, Jaimie
Angaran, Paul
Rinne, Claus
Coutu, Benoit
Low, R Aaron
Essebag, Vidal
Morillo, Carlos
Redfearn, Damian
Toal, Satish
Becker, Giuliano
Degrâce, Michel
Thibault, Bernard
Crystal, Eugene
Tung, Stanley
LeMaitre, John
Sultan, Omar
Bennett, Matthew
Bashir, Jamil
Ayala-Paredes, Felix
Rioux, Leon
Hemels, Martin E W
Bouwels, Leon H R
Exner, Derek V
Dorian, Paul
Connolly, Stuart J
Krahn, Andrew D
author_sort Longtin, Yves
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The Prevention of Arrhythmia Device Infection Trial (PADIT) investigated whether intensification of perioperative prophylaxis could prevent cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infections. Compared with a single dose of cefazolin, the perioperative administration of cefazolin, vancomycin, bacitracin, and cephalexin did not significantly decrease the risk of infection. Our objective was to compare the microbiology of infections between study arms in PADIT. METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis. Differences between study arms in the microbiology of infections were assessed at the level of individual patients and at the level of microorganisms using the Fisher exact test. RESULTS: Overall, 209 microorganisms were reported from 177 patients. The most common microorganisms were coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS; 82/209 [39.2%]) and S. aureus (75/209 [35.9%]). There was a significantly lower proportion of CoNS in the incremental arm compared with the standard arm (30.1% vs 46.6%; P = .04). However, there was no significant difference between study arms in the frequency of recovery of other microorganisms. In terms of antimicrobial susceptibility, 26.5% of microorganisms were resistant to cefazolin. CoNS were more likely to be cefazolin-resistant in the incremental arm (52.2% vs 26.8%, respectively; P = .05). However, there was no difference between study arms in terms of infections in which the main pathogen was sensitive to cefazolin (77.8% vs 64.3%; P = .10) or vancomycin (90.8% vs 90.2%; P = .90). CONCLUSIONS: Intensification of the prophylaxis led to significant changes in the microbiology of infections, despite the absence of a decrease in the overall risk of infections. These findings provide important insight on the physiopathology of CIED infections. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01002911.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8632784
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-86327842021-12-01 Impact of Choice of Prophylaxis on the Microbiology of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Infections: Insights From the Prevention of Arrhythmia Device Infection Trial (PADIT) Longtin, Yves Gervais, Philippe Birnie, David H Wang, Jia Alings, Marco Philippon, François Parkash, Ratika Manlucu, Jaimie Angaran, Paul Rinne, Claus Coutu, Benoit Low, R Aaron Essebag, Vidal Morillo, Carlos Redfearn, Damian Toal, Satish Becker, Giuliano Degrâce, Michel Thibault, Bernard Crystal, Eugene Tung, Stanley LeMaitre, John Sultan, Omar Bennett, Matthew Bashir, Jamil Ayala-Paredes, Felix Rioux, Leon Hemels, Martin E W Bouwels, Leon H R Exner, Derek V Dorian, Paul Connolly, Stuart J Krahn, Andrew D Open Forum Infect Dis Major Articles BACKGROUND: The Prevention of Arrhythmia Device Infection Trial (PADIT) investigated whether intensification of perioperative prophylaxis could prevent cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infections. Compared with a single dose of cefazolin, the perioperative administration of cefazolin, vancomycin, bacitracin, and cephalexin did not significantly decrease the risk of infection. Our objective was to compare the microbiology of infections between study arms in PADIT. METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis. Differences between study arms in the microbiology of infections were assessed at the level of individual patients and at the level of microorganisms using the Fisher exact test. RESULTS: Overall, 209 microorganisms were reported from 177 patients. The most common microorganisms were coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS; 82/209 [39.2%]) and S. aureus (75/209 [35.9%]). There was a significantly lower proportion of CoNS in the incremental arm compared with the standard arm (30.1% vs 46.6%; P = .04). However, there was no significant difference between study arms in the frequency of recovery of other microorganisms. In terms of antimicrobial susceptibility, 26.5% of microorganisms were resistant to cefazolin. CoNS were more likely to be cefazolin-resistant in the incremental arm (52.2% vs 26.8%, respectively; P = .05). However, there was no difference between study arms in terms of infections in which the main pathogen was sensitive to cefazolin (77.8% vs 64.3%; P = .10) or vancomycin (90.8% vs 90.2%; P = .90). CONCLUSIONS: Intensification of the prophylaxis led to significant changes in the microbiology of infections, despite the absence of a decrease in the overall risk of infections. These findings provide important insight on the physiopathology of CIED infections. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01002911. Oxford University Press 2021-10-14 /pmc/articles/PMC8632784/ /pubmed/34859113 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofab513 Text en © The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Major Articles
Longtin, Yves
Gervais, Philippe
Birnie, David H
Wang, Jia
Alings, Marco
Philippon, François
Parkash, Ratika
Manlucu, Jaimie
Angaran, Paul
Rinne, Claus
Coutu, Benoit
Low, R Aaron
Essebag, Vidal
Morillo, Carlos
Redfearn, Damian
Toal, Satish
Becker, Giuliano
Degrâce, Michel
Thibault, Bernard
Crystal, Eugene
Tung, Stanley
LeMaitre, John
Sultan, Omar
Bennett, Matthew
Bashir, Jamil
Ayala-Paredes, Felix
Rioux, Leon
Hemels, Martin E W
Bouwels, Leon H R
Exner, Derek V
Dorian, Paul
Connolly, Stuart J
Krahn, Andrew D
Impact of Choice of Prophylaxis on the Microbiology of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Infections: Insights From the Prevention of Arrhythmia Device Infection Trial (PADIT)
title Impact of Choice of Prophylaxis on the Microbiology of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Infections: Insights From the Prevention of Arrhythmia Device Infection Trial (PADIT)
title_full Impact of Choice of Prophylaxis on the Microbiology of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Infections: Insights From the Prevention of Arrhythmia Device Infection Trial (PADIT)
title_fullStr Impact of Choice of Prophylaxis on the Microbiology of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Infections: Insights From the Prevention of Arrhythmia Device Infection Trial (PADIT)
title_full_unstemmed Impact of Choice of Prophylaxis on the Microbiology of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Infections: Insights From the Prevention of Arrhythmia Device Infection Trial (PADIT)
title_short Impact of Choice of Prophylaxis on the Microbiology of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Infections: Insights From the Prevention of Arrhythmia Device Infection Trial (PADIT)
title_sort impact of choice of prophylaxis on the microbiology of cardiac implantable electronic device infections: insights from the prevention of arrhythmia device infection trial (padit)
topic Major Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8632784/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34859113
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofab513
work_keys_str_mv AT longtinyves impactofchoiceofprophylaxisonthemicrobiologyofcardiacimplantableelectronicdeviceinfectionsinsightsfromthepreventionofarrhythmiadeviceinfectiontrialpadit
AT gervaisphilippe impactofchoiceofprophylaxisonthemicrobiologyofcardiacimplantableelectronicdeviceinfectionsinsightsfromthepreventionofarrhythmiadeviceinfectiontrialpadit
AT birniedavidh impactofchoiceofprophylaxisonthemicrobiologyofcardiacimplantableelectronicdeviceinfectionsinsightsfromthepreventionofarrhythmiadeviceinfectiontrialpadit
AT wangjia impactofchoiceofprophylaxisonthemicrobiologyofcardiacimplantableelectronicdeviceinfectionsinsightsfromthepreventionofarrhythmiadeviceinfectiontrialpadit
AT alingsmarco impactofchoiceofprophylaxisonthemicrobiologyofcardiacimplantableelectronicdeviceinfectionsinsightsfromthepreventionofarrhythmiadeviceinfectiontrialpadit
AT philipponfrancois impactofchoiceofprophylaxisonthemicrobiologyofcardiacimplantableelectronicdeviceinfectionsinsightsfromthepreventionofarrhythmiadeviceinfectiontrialpadit
AT parkashratika impactofchoiceofprophylaxisonthemicrobiologyofcardiacimplantableelectronicdeviceinfectionsinsightsfromthepreventionofarrhythmiadeviceinfectiontrialpadit
AT manlucujaimie impactofchoiceofprophylaxisonthemicrobiologyofcardiacimplantableelectronicdeviceinfectionsinsightsfromthepreventionofarrhythmiadeviceinfectiontrialpadit
AT angaranpaul impactofchoiceofprophylaxisonthemicrobiologyofcardiacimplantableelectronicdeviceinfectionsinsightsfromthepreventionofarrhythmiadeviceinfectiontrialpadit
AT rinneclaus impactofchoiceofprophylaxisonthemicrobiologyofcardiacimplantableelectronicdeviceinfectionsinsightsfromthepreventionofarrhythmiadeviceinfectiontrialpadit
AT coutubenoit impactofchoiceofprophylaxisonthemicrobiologyofcardiacimplantableelectronicdeviceinfectionsinsightsfromthepreventionofarrhythmiadeviceinfectiontrialpadit
AT lowraaron impactofchoiceofprophylaxisonthemicrobiologyofcardiacimplantableelectronicdeviceinfectionsinsightsfromthepreventionofarrhythmiadeviceinfectiontrialpadit
AT essebagvidal impactofchoiceofprophylaxisonthemicrobiologyofcardiacimplantableelectronicdeviceinfectionsinsightsfromthepreventionofarrhythmiadeviceinfectiontrialpadit
AT morillocarlos impactofchoiceofprophylaxisonthemicrobiologyofcardiacimplantableelectronicdeviceinfectionsinsightsfromthepreventionofarrhythmiadeviceinfectiontrialpadit
AT redfearndamian impactofchoiceofprophylaxisonthemicrobiologyofcardiacimplantableelectronicdeviceinfectionsinsightsfromthepreventionofarrhythmiadeviceinfectiontrialpadit
AT toalsatish impactofchoiceofprophylaxisonthemicrobiologyofcardiacimplantableelectronicdeviceinfectionsinsightsfromthepreventionofarrhythmiadeviceinfectiontrialpadit
AT beckergiuliano impactofchoiceofprophylaxisonthemicrobiologyofcardiacimplantableelectronicdeviceinfectionsinsightsfromthepreventionofarrhythmiadeviceinfectiontrialpadit
AT degracemichel impactofchoiceofprophylaxisonthemicrobiologyofcardiacimplantableelectronicdeviceinfectionsinsightsfromthepreventionofarrhythmiadeviceinfectiontrialpadit
AT thibaultbernard impactofchoiceofprophylaxisonthemicrobiologyofcardiacimplantableelectronicdeviceinfectionsinsightsfromthepreventionofarrhythmiadeviceinfectiontrialpadit
AT crystaleugene impactofchoiceofprophylaxisonthemicrobiologyofcardiacimplantableelectronicdeviceinfectionsinsightsfromthepreventionofarrhythmiadeviceinfectiontrialpadit
AT tungstanley impactofchoiceofprophylaxisonthemicrobiologyofcardiacimplantableelectronicdeviceinfectionsinsightsfromthepreventionofarrhythmiadeviceinfectiontrialpadit
AT lemaitrejohn impactofchoiceofprophylaxisonthemicrobiologyofcardiacimplantableelectronicdeviceinfectionsinsightsfromthepreventionofarrhythmiadeviceinfectiontrialpadit
AT sultanomar impactofchoiceofprophylaxisonthemicrobiologyofcardiacimplantableelectronicdeviceinfectionsinsightsfromthepreventionofarrhythmiadeviceinfectiontrialpadit
AT bennettmatthew impactofchoiceofprophylaxisonthemicrobiologyofcardiacimplantableelectronicdeviceinfectionsinsightsfromthepreventionofarrhythmiadeviceinfectiontrialpadit
AT bashirjamil impactofchoiceofprophylaxisonthemicrobiologyofcardiacimplantableelectronicdeviceinfectionsinsightsfromthepreventionofarrhythmiadeviceinfectiontrialpadit
AT ayalaparedesfelix impactofchoiceofprophylaxisonthemicrobiologyofcardiacimplantableelectronicdeviceinfectionsinsightsfromthepreventionofarrhythmiadeviceinfectiontrialpadit
AT riouxleon impactofchoiceofprophylaxisonthemicrobiologyofcardiacimplantableelectronicdeviceinfectionsinsightsfromthepreventionofarrhythmiadeviceinfectiontrialpadit
AT hemelsmartinew impactofchoiceofprophylaxisonthemicrobiologyofcardiacimplantableelectronicdeviceinfectionsinsightsfromthepreventionofarrhythmiadeviceinfectiontrialpadit
AT bouwelsleonhr impactofchoiceofprophylaxisonthemicrobiologyofcardiacimplantableelectronicdeviceinfectionsinsightsfromthepreventionofarrhythmiadeviceinfectiontrialpadit
AT exnerderekv impactofchoiceofprophylaxisonthemicrobiologyofcardiacimplantableelectronicdeviceinfectionsinsightsfromthepreventionofarrhythmiadeviceinfectiontrialpadit
AT dorianpaul impactofchoiceofprophylaxisonthemicrobiologyofcardiacimplantableelectronicdeviceinfectionsinsightsfromthepreventionofarrhythmiadeviceinfectiontrialpadit
AT connollystuartj impactofchoiceofprophylaxisonthemicrobiologyofcardiacimplantableelectronicdeviceinfectionsinsightsfromthepreventionofarrhythmiadeviceinfectiontrialpadit
AT krahnandrewd impactofchoiceofprophylaxisonthemicrobiologyofcardiacimplantableelectronicdeviceinfectionsinsightsfromthepreventionofarrhythmiadeviceinfectiontrialpadit