Is there an optimal timing for device reimplantation after lead extraction due to CIED infection?

Abstract Introduction Complete cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIED) removal is recommended for all patients (P) with confirmed CIED infection, regardless of whether there is definite evidence of device involvement. However, when considering device reimplantation, optimal timing following transvenous lead removal remains unclear. Purpose Our study aimed to evaluate the short and long term effects of different device reimplantation times in P that underwent CIED removal due to infection. Methods Prospective single-centre study in P that underwent lead extraction due to CIED infection and in whom device reimplantation was performed. P were divided into three groups, according to timing of device reimplantation: Group A (reimplantation in <72h), Group B (reimplantation in 72h-2 weeks), and Group C (reimplantation in >2 weeks). Follow-up of the three groups was performed in the short-term - regarding the need for urgent surgical intervention or death/complications/reintervention during hospitalization - and long-term – one-year mortality or rehospitalisation. Results From a total of 257 P, CIED infection was present in 205 P (80%). 116 P (57%) underwent device reimplantation, which performed in the same hospitalization in 110 P. 160 P (78%) were male, median age was 75 (IQR 62-82) years, median dwell time of the leads was 84 (IQR 36-132) months. In 55% of the cases there was pocket infection only, 66 P (32%) had positive blood cultures, 39 P (19%) were under targeted antibiotic therapy and 80 P (39%) had positive cultures from the procedure. Regarding the CIED that underwent extraction, 47% were pacemakers (8% VVI, 8% VDD and 31% DDD), 6% were ICD and 11% were CRT – median number of electrodes was 2 (IQR 1-2). Median time to reimplantation after device removal in patients with positive blood cultures was 5 (IQR 2-7) days. Regarding device reimplantation, there were 38 P (19%) in group A, 60 P (29%) in group B and 18 P (9%) in Group C. Differences between the three groups in terms of blood cultures, targeted antibiotic therapy and pre and post-device removal duration of antibiotic therapy are shown in table 1. Median follow-up time was 26 (IQR 13-54) months. The differences between the three groups regarding short and long-term follow-up are shown in table 2. Conclusion In our study distinct timings of device reimplantation after CIED extraction due to infection did not show differences regarding short or long-term follow-up.Table 1 Table 2

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
EP Europace
Published
2025-05-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/europace/euaf085.661
Primary Topic
Recycling and Waste Management Techniques
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Is there an optimal timing for device reimplantation after lead extraction due to CIED infection?

Ana Lousinha, Bianor Valente, Mário Oliveira, Pedro Silva Cunha et al.
EP Europace
Recycling and Waste Management Techniques
article

Is there an optimal timing for device reimplantation after lead extraction due to CIED infection?

Ana Lousinha, Bianor Valente, Mário Oliveira, Pedro Silva Cunha, Ana Cristina Ferreira, G Portugal, M Figueiredo, R. Cruz Ferreira, H Santos
article en

Abstract

Abstract Introduction Complete cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIED) removal is recommended for all patients (P) with confirmed CIED infection, regardless of whether there is definite evidence of device involvement. However, when considering device reimplantation, optimal timing following transvenous lead removal remains unclear. Purpose Our study aimed to evaluate the short and long term effects of different device reimplantation times in P that underwent CIED removal due to infection. Methods Prospective single-centre study in P that underwent lead extraction due to CIED infection and in whom device reimplantation was performed. P were divided into three groups, according to timing of device reimplantation: Group A (reimplantation in <72h), Group B (reimplantation in 72h-2 weeks), and Group C (reimplantation in >2 weeks). Follow-up of the three groups was performed in the short-term - regarding the need for urgent surgical intervention or death/complications/reintervention during hospitalization - and long-term – one-year mortality or rehospitalisation. Results From a total of 257 P, CIED infection was present in 205 P (80%). 116 P (57%) underwent device reimplantation, which performed in the same hospitalization in 110 P. 160 P (78%) were male, median age was 75 (IQR 62-82) years, median dwell time of the leads was 84 (IQR 36-132) months. In 55% of the cases there was pocket infection only, 66 P (32%) had positive blood cultures, 39 P (19%) were under targeted antibiotic therapy and 80 P (39%) had positive cultures from the procedure. Regarding the CIED that underwent extraction, 47% were pacemakers (8% VVI, 8% VDD and 31% DDD), 6% were ICD and 11% were CRT – median number of electrodes was 2 (IQR 1-2). Median time to reimplantation after device removal in patients with positive blood cultures was 5 (IQR 2-7) days. Regarding device reimplantation, there were 38 P (19%) in group A, 60 P (29%) in group B and 18 P (9%) in Group C. Differences between the three groups in terms of blood cultures, targeted antibiotic therapy and pre and post-device removal duration of antibiotic therapy are shown in table 1. Median follow-up time was 26 (IQR 13-54) months. The differences between the three groups regarding short and long-term follow-up are shown in table 2. Conclusion In our study distinct timings of device reimplantation after CIED extraction due to infection did not show differences regarding short or long-term follow-up.Table 1 Table 2

EP EuropaceVol. 27(Supplement_1)
Hospital de Santa Marta (PT)
Openalex Percentile: Top 86%
Recycling and Waste Management Techniques
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.