The effect of cardiovascular implantable electronic device(CIED)re-implantion time after the pacing leads be extractedby superior vena cava and inferior vena cava approaches because of CIED infection

wang yong,li xuebin,ze feng,duan jiangbo,ma feng
DOI: https://doi.org/10.13333/j.cnki.cjcpe.2017.04.011
2017-01-01
Abstract:Objective To discuss the effect of cardiovascular implantable electronic device(CIED)re-implantion time on CIED dependent patients,after pacing leads be extracted because of CIED pocket infection,through two approaches,including the superior vena cava approach and inferior vena cava approach. Methods Patients underwent extracting pacing leads from the Heart Center of Peking University People′s Hospital in 2015 were selected.The patients with CIED pocket infection,on CIED dependant,and must be re-implanted were selected.The base characteristics,clinical presentation,leads extraction approaches,preoperative and postoperative body temperature,routine blood test,blood culture results,re-implanted time after pacing leads be extracted were analyzed retrospectively.The effect of different approaches on general case of patients postoperative and the CIED re-implantion time were assessed. Rseults Ninety-five patients by CIED pocket infection were extracted pacing leads successfully,and selected a time to re-implanted CIED.In this case study,average pacemaker implantion time of inferior vena cava group was longer[72(48,26)mouths vs 12(8,24)mouths,P<0.01].The body temperature and hemogram of poseoperative in the inferior vena cava group were raised more[40.7%(22/54)vs 12.2%(5/41),61%(33/54)vs 4.9%(2/41),P<0.05].Average CIED re-implantion time was prolonged[5(2,7)days vs 2(2,5)days,(P <0.05)].The positive rate of blood culture postoperative was bigger[3/54 vs 0]. Conclusion The time of re-implantion in the inferior vena cava group is obviously prolonged.[Chinese Journal of Cardiac Pacing and Electrophysiology,2017,31(4):326-329]
What problem does this paper attempt to address?