A Prediction Score for Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Device Infection in Non– Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia

BACKGROUND: Patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) who develop bacteremia require risk stratification for device infection. Although prediction scores exist for Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia, no comparable CIED-specific tool exists for non-S. aureus bacteremia. Our study aimed to estimate the probability of definite CIED infection in adults with non-S. aureus bacteremia without pocket infection. METHODS: We performed a prediction-model analysis of adults with CIEDs and non-S. aureus bacteremia, comprising gram-negative bacteremia (GNB) and gram-positive cocci other than S. aureus (GPC) bacteremia, at Mayo Clinic Rochester during 2012-2019. Patients with pocket infection were excluded. Definite CIED infection was classified using 2019 European Heart Rhythm Association criteria. Penalized logistic regression was used to construct two prediction models for definite infection: a full model with nine prespecified predictors, and a reduced model from which a point-based risk score could be obtained. RESULTS: A total of 282 patients with CIEDs developed non-S. aureus bacteremia. Median age was 75 years; 69% were men. GPC bacteremia occurred in 156 patients (55%) and GNB in 126 (45%). Sixty patients (21%) had definite CIED infection. Both the full and reduced models demonstrated excellent predictive discrimination (apparent area under receiver operating characteristic curve 0.946 and 0.940). The reduced model retained four predictors: GPC bacteremia, persistent bacteremia, longer time to positivity, and unknown bacteremia source. CONCLUSION: A four-variable risk score incorporating organism category, persistent bacteremia, time to positivity, and unknown bacteremia source may guide early device-focused evaluation, but external validation is required before clinical adoption.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology
Published
2026-09-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/pace.70456
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
article

A Prediction Score for Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Device Infection in Non– Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia

Daniel Christopher DeSimone, Brian D. Lahr, Supavit Chesdachai, Guillermo Cuervo et al.
Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology
Cardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
article

A Prediction Score for Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Device Infection in Non– Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia

Daniel Christopher DeSimone, Brian D. Lahr, Supavit Chesdachai, Guillermo Cuervo, Larry M. Baddour, Christopher V. DeSimone, Abhishek J. Deshmukh
article en

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) who develop bacteremia require risk stratification for device infection. Although prediction scores exist for Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia, no comparable CIED-specific tool exists for non-S. aureus bacteremia. Our study aimed to estimate the probability of definite CIED infection in adults with non-S. aureus bacteremia without pocket infection. METHODS: We performed a prediction-model analysis of adults with CIEDs and non-S. aureus bacteremia, comprising gram-negative bacteremia (GNB) and gram-positive cocci other than S. aureus (GPC) bacteremia, at Mayo Clinic Rochester during 2012-2019. Patients with pocket infection were excluded. Definite CIED infection was classified using 2019 European Heart Rhythm Association criteria. Penalized logistic regression was used to construct two prediction models for definite infection: a full model with nine prespecified predictors, and a reduced model from which a point-based risk score could be obtained. RESULTS: A total of 282 patients with CIEDs developed non-S. aureus bacteremia. Median age was 75 years; 69% were men. GPC bacteremia occurred in 156 patients (55%) and GNB in 126 (45%). Sixty patients (21%) had definite CIED infection. Both the full and reduced models demonstrated excellent predictive discrimination (apparent area under receiver operating characteristic curve 0.946 and 0.940). The reduced model retained four predictors: GPC bacteremia, persistent bacteremia, longer time to positivity, and unknown bacteremia source. CONCLUSION: A four-variable risk score incorporating organism category, persistent bacteremia, time to positivity, and unknown bacteremia source may guide early device-focused evaluation, but external validation is required before clinical adoption.

Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology
Mayo Clinic (US), Hospital Clínic de Barcelona (ES)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 12%
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.