Antimicrobial Pocket Flush and Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Infection: Meta‐Analysis of Real‐World Studies

INTRODUCTION: Clinical guidelines do not recommend the routine rinsing of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) with antimicrobials before pocket closure("antimicrobial pocket flush.") However, despite current recommendations and a lack of evidence regarding the utility of this practice for reducing CIED infections, the antimicrobial pocket flush is still commonly employed. Clarifying the true value of this technique is important for supporting evidence-based practice and avoiding unnecessary antimicrobial use. Therefore, we performed meta-analysis of observational studies to determine the effectiveness of this practice in preventing CIED infections. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search for observational human studies investigating the effectiveness of employing the antimicrobial pocket flush to prevent CIED infection. A random effects meta-analysis was performed. Effectiveness was estimated with the study-level definitions of CIED infection. We performed subgroup analysis by type of antimicrobial-antiseptic or antibiotic. RESULTS: A total of seven studies including 12,283 patients were analyzed. Over half of the CIED implantation procedures (61.5%) included the antimicrobial pocket flush, and between 8.4% and 85% of the implantations were revision procedures. Studies used various antimicrobials for pocket flush, and definitions of CIED infection varied. Overall infection rates ranged from 0.5%-1.5%. CIED infection rates did not differ significantly between procedures performed with versus without antimicrobial pocket flush (0.8% vs. 1.1%; relative risk 0.80; 95% confidence interval 0.39-1.63; p = 0.54). There was no difference in the subgroup analysis by antiseptic or antibiotic use. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that the antimicrobial pocket flush provides no benefit in preventing CIED infection, reinforcing the current guidelines that do not support its routine use.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology
Published
2026-05-31
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/pace.70264
Primary Topic
Cardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Antimicrobial Pocket Flush and Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Infection: Meta‐Analysis of Real‐World Studies

Mohamad Raad, J. Greenberg, Bharat Rawlley, Waddah Maskoun et al.
Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology
Cardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
article

Antimicrobial Pocket Flush and Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Infection: Meta‐Analysis of Real‐World Studies

Mohamad Raad, J. Greenberg, Bharat Rawlley, Waddah Maskoun, Tanya Singh Kakar, Arfaat Khan, Amit Noheria, Kartik Gupta, Karl Ilg
article en

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Clinical guidelines do not recommend the routine rinsing of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) with antimicrobials before pocket closure("antimicrobial pocket flush.") However, despite current recommendations and a lack of evidence regarding the utility of this practice for reducing CIED infections, the antimicrobial pocket flush is still commonly employed. Clarifying the true value of this technique is important for supporting evidence-based practice and avoiding unnecessary antimicrobial use. Therefore, we performed meta-analysis of observational studies to determine the effectiveness of this practice in preventing CIED infections. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search for observational human studies investigating the effectiveness of employing the antimicrobial pocket flush to prevent CIED infection. A random effects meta-analysis was performed. Effectiveness was estimated with the study-level definitions of CIED infection. We performed subgroup analysis by type of antimicrobial-antiseptic or antibiotic. RESULTS: A total of seven studies including 12,283 patients were analyzed. Over half of the CIED implantation procedures (61.5%) included the antimicrobial pocket flush, and between 8.4% and 85% of the implantations were revision procedures. Studies used various antimicrobials for pocket flush, and definitions of CIED infection varied. Overall infection rates ranged from 0.5%-1.5%. CIED infection rates did not differ significantly between procedures performed with versus without antimicrobial pocket flush (0.8% vs. 1.1%; relative risk 0.80; 95% confidence interval 0.39-1.63; p = 0.54). There was no difference in the subgroup analysis by antiseptic or antibiotic use. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that the antimicrobial pocket flush provides no benefit in preventing CIED infection, reinforcing the current guidelines that do not support its routine use.

Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology
Henry Ford Health System (US), Wayne State University (US), University of Vermont Medical Center (US), Henry Ford Hospital (US), University of Kansas Medical Center (US), Michigan State University (US)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Cardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
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.