Cargando…
Evaluation of a novel mechanical compression device for hematoma prevention and wound cosmesis after CIED implantation
BACKGROUND: An important complication of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) implantation is the development of hematoma and device infection. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate a novel mechanical compression device for hematoma prevention and cosmetic outcomes following CIED implantation. ME...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9310802/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35174901 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/pace.14454 |
_version_ | 1784753467832664064 |
---|---|
author | Rojas, Edward Morgaenko, Katerina Brown, Louis Kim, Sieu Mazimba, Sula Malhotra, Rohit Darby, Andrew Monfredi, Oliver Mason, Pamela Mangrum, James Michael Haines, David E. Campbell, Christopher Bilchick, Kenneth Mehta, Nishaki K. |
author_facet | Rojas, Edward Morgaenko, Katerina Brown, Louis Kim, Sieu Mazimba, Sula Malhotra, Rohit Darby, Andrew Monfredi, Oliver Mason, Pamela Mangrum, James Michael Haines, David E. Campbell, Christopher Bilchick, Kenneth Mehta, Nishaki K. |
author_sort | Rojas, Edward |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: An important complication of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) implantation is the development of hematoma and device infection. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate a novel mechanical compression device for hematoma prevention and cosmetic outcomes following CIED implantation. METHODS: An open, prospective, randomized, single‐center clinical trial was performed in patients undergoing CIED implantation. Patients were randomized to receive a novel mechanical compression device (PressRite, PR) or to receive the standard of care post device implantation. Skin pliability was measured with a calibrated durometer; the surgical site was evaluated using the Manchester Scar Scale (MSS) by a blinded plastic surgeon and the Patient and Observer Scar Scale (POSAS). Performance of PR was assessed through pressure measurements, standardized scar scales and tolerability. RESULTS: From the total of 114 patients evaluated for enrollment, 105 patients were eligible for analysis. Fifty‐one patients were randomized to management group (PR) and 54 to the control group. No patients required early removal or experienced adverse effects from PR application. There were 11 hematomas (14.8% vs. 5.9% in the control and PR group respectively, p = NS). The control group had higher post procedure durometer readings in the surgical site when compared with the PR group (7.50 ± 3.45 vs. 5.37 ± 2.78; p = < .01). There were lower MSS scores in the PR group after 2 weeks (p = .03). CONCLUSION: We have demonstrated the safety of PR application and removal. In addition, PR appears to improve postoperative skin pliability, which could facilitate wound healing. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9310802 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-93108022022-07-29 Evaluation of a novel mechanical compression device for hematoma prevention and wound cosmesis after CIED implantation Rojas, Edward Morgaenko, Katerina Brown, Louis Kim, Sieu Mazimba, Sula Malhotra, Rohit Darby, Andrew Monfredi, Oliver Mason, Pamela Mangrum, James Michael Haines, David E. Campbell, Christopher Bilchick, Kenneth Mehta, Nishaki K. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol Devices BACKGROUND: An important complication of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) implantation is the development of hematoma and device infection. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate a novel mechanical compression device for hematoma prevention and cosmetic outcomes following CIED implantation. METHODS: An open, prospective, randomized, single‐center clinical trial was performed in patients undergoing CIED implantation. Patients were randomized to receive a novel mechanical compression device (PressRite, PR) or to receive the standard of care post device implantation. Skin pliability was measured with a calibrated durometer; the surgical site was evaluated using the Manchester Scar Scale (MSS) by a blinded plastic surgeon and the Patient and Observer Scar Scale (POSAS). Performance of PR was assessed through pressure measurements, standardized scar scales and tolerability. RESULTS: From the total of 114 patients evaluated for enrollment, 105 patients were eligible for analysis. Fifty‐one patients were randomized to management group (PR) and 54 to the control group. No patients required early removal or experienced adverse effects from PR application. There were 11 hematomas (14.8% vs. 5.9% in the control and PR group respectively, p = NS). The control group had higher post procedure durometer readings in the surgical site when compared with the PR group (7.50 ± 3.45 vs. 5.37 ± 2.78; p = < .01). There were lower MSS scores in the PR group after 2 weeks (p = .03). CONCLUSION: We have demonstrated the safety of PR application and removal. In addition, PR appears to improve postoperative skin pliability, which could facilitate wound healing. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-03-04 2022-04 /pmc/articles/PMC9310802/ /pubmed/35174901 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/pace.14454 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. |
spellingShingle | Devices Rojas, Edward Morgaenko, Katerina Brown, Louis Kim, Sieu Mazimba, Sula Malhotra, Rohit Darby, Andrew Monfredi, Oliver Mason, Pamela Mangrum, James Michael Haines, David E. Campbell, Christopher Bilchick, Kenneth Mehta, Nishaki K. Evaluation of a novel mechanical compression device for hematoma prevention and wound cosmesis after CIED implantation |
title | Evaluation of a novel mechanical compression device for hematoma prevention and wound cosmesis after CIED implantation |
title_full | Evaluation of a novel mechanical compression device for hematoma prevention and wound cosmesis after CIED implantation |
title_fullStr | Evaluation of a novel mechanical compression device for hematoma prevention and wound cosmesis after CIED implantation |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluation of a novel mechanical compression device for hematoma prevention and wound cosmesis after CIED implantation |
title_short | Evaluation of a novel mechanical compression device for hematoma prevention and wound cosmesis after CIED implantation |
title_sort | evaluation of a novel mechanical compression device for hematoma prevention and wound cosmesis after cied implantation |
topic | Devices |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9310802/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35174901 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/pace.14454 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT rojasedward evaluationofanovelmechanicalcompressiondeviceforhematomapreventionandwoundcosmesisafterciedimplantation AT morgaenkokaterina evaluationofanovelmechanicalcompressiondeviceforhematomapreventionandwoundcosmesisafterciedimplantation AT brownlouis evaluationofanovelmechanicalcompressiondeviceforhematomapreventionandwoundcosmesisafterciedimplantation AT kimsieu evaluationofanovelmechanicalcompressiondeviceforhematomapreventionandwoundcosmesisafterciedimplantation AT mazimbasula evaluationofanovelmechanicalcompressiondeviceforhematomapreventionandwoundcosmesisafterciedimplantation AT malhotrarohit evaluationofanovelmechanicalcompressiondeviceforhematomapreventionandwoundcosmesisafterciedimplantation AT darbyandrew evaluationofanovelmechanicalcompressiondeviceforhematomapreventionandwoundcosmesisafterciedimplantation AT monfredioliver evaluationofanovelmechanicalcompressiondeviceforhematomapreventionandwoundcosmesisafterciedimplantation AT masonpamela evaluationofanovelmechanicalcompressiondeviceforhematomapreventionandwoundcosmesisafterciedimplantation AT mangrumjamesmichael evaluationofanovelmechanicalcompressiondeviceforhematomapreventionandwoundcosmesisafterciedimplantation AT hainesdavide evaluationofanovelmechanicalcompressiondeviceforhematomapreventionandwoundcosmesisafterciedimplantation AT campbellchristopher evaluationofanovelmechanicalcompressiondeviceforhematomapreventionandwoundcosmesisafterciedimplantation AT bilchickkenneth evaluationofanovelmechanicalcompressiondeviceforhematomapreventionandwoundcosmesisafterciedimplantation AT mehtanishakik evaluationofanovelmechanicalcompressiondeviceforhematomapreventionandwoundcosmesisafterciedimplantation |