1. |
|
|
2. |
- Blomström-Lundqvist, Carina, 1954-, et al.
(author)
-
European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) international consensus document on how to prevent, diagnose, and treat cardiac implantable electronic device infections : endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS), International Society for Cardiovascular Infectious Diseases (ISCVID) and the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID) in collaboration with the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS)
- 2020
-
In: Europace. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 1099-5129 .- 1532-2092. ; 22:4, s. 515-516ag
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Pacemakers, implantable cardiac defibrillators, and cardiac resynchronization therapy devices are potentially life-saving treatments for a number of cardiac conditions, but are not without risk. Most concerning is the risk of a cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infection, which is associated with significant morbidity, increased hospitalizations, reduced survival, and increased healthcare costs. Recommended preventive strategies such as administration of intravenous antibiotics before implantation are well recognized. Uncertainties have remained about the role of various preventive, diagnostic, and treatment measures such as skin antiseptics, pocket antibiotic solutions, anti-bacterial envelopes, prolonged antibiotics post-implantation, and others. Guidance on whether to use novel device alternatives expected to be less prone to infections and novel oral anticoagulants is also limited, as are definitions on minimum quality requirements for centres and operators and volumes. Moreover, an international consensus document on management of CIED infections is lacking. The recognition of these issues, the dissemination of results from important randomized trials focusing on prevention of CIED infections, and observed divergences in managing device-related infections as found in an European Heart Rhythm Association worldwide survey, provided a strong incentive for a 2019 International State-of-the-art Consensus document on risk assessment, prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of CIED infections.
|
|
3. |
- Blomström-Lundqvist, Carina, et al.
(author)
-
European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) international consensus document on how to prevent, diagnose, and treat cardiac implantable electronic device infections-endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS), International Society for Cardiovascular Infectious Diseases (ISCVID) and the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID) in collaboration with the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). : European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) international consensus document on how to prevent, diagnose, and treat cardiac implantable electronic device infections.
- 2020
-
In: European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 1873-734X. ; 57:1, s. 1-31
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Pacemakers, implantable cardiac defibrillators, and cardiac resynchronization therapy devices are potentially life-saving treatments for a number of cardiac conditions, but are not without risk. Most concerning is the risk of a cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infection, which is associated with significant morbidity, increased hospitalizations, reduced survival, and increased healthcare costs. Recommended preventive strategies such as administration of intravenous antibiotics before implantation are well recognized. Uncertainties have remained about the role of various preventive, diagnostic, and treatment measures such as skin antiseptics, pocket antibiotic solutions, anti-bacterial envelopes, prolonged antibiotics post-implantation, and others. Guidance on whether to use novel device alternatives expected to be less prone to infections and novel oral anticoagulants is also limited, as are definitions on minimum quality requirements for centres and operators and volumes. Moreover, an international consensus document on management of CIED infections is lacking. The recognition of these issues, the dissemination of results from important randomized trials focusing on prevention of CIED infections, and observed divergences in managing device-related infections as found in an European Heart Rhythm Association worldwide survey, provided a strong incentive for a 2019 International State-of-the-art Consensus document on risk assessment, prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of CIED infections.
|
|
4. |
- Sridhar, Arun R., et al.
(author)
-
Identifying Risk of Adverse Outcomes in COVID-19 Patients via Artificial Intelligence-Powered Analysis of 12-Lead Intake Electrocardiogram.
- 2022
-
In: Cardiovascular digital health journal. - : Elsevier. - 2666-6936. ; 3:2, s. 62-74
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: Adverse events in COVID-19 are difficult to predict. Risk stratification is encumbered by the need to protect healthcare workers. We hypothesize that AI can help identify subtle signs of myocardial involvement in the 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG), which could help predict complications.Objective: Use intake ECGs from COVID-19 patients to train AI models to predict risk of mortality or major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE).Methods: We studied intake ECGs from 1448 COVID-19 patients (60.5% male, 63.4±16.9 years). Records were labeled by mortality (death vs. discharge) or MACE (no events vs. arrhythmic, heart failure [HF], or thromboembolic [TE] events), then used to train AI models; these were compared to conventional regression models developed using demographic and comorbidity data.Results: 245 (17.7%) patients died (67.3% male, 74.5±14.4 years); 352 (24.4%) experienced at least one MACE (119 arrhythmic; 107 HF; 130 TE). AI models predicted mortality and MACE with area under the curve (AUC) values of 0.60±0.05 and 0.55±0.07, respectively; these were comparable to AUC values for conventional models (0.73±0.07 and 0.65±0.10). There were no prominent temporal trends in mortality rate or MACE incidence in our cohort; holdout testing with data from after a cutoff date (June 9, 2020) did not degrade model performance.Conclusion: Using intake ECGs alone, our AI models had limited ability to predict hospitalized COVID-19 patients' risk of mortality or MACE. Our models' accuracy was comparable to that of conventional models built using more in-depth information, but translation to clinical use would require higher sensitivity and positive predictive value. In the future, we hope that mixed-input AI models utilizing both ECG and clinical data may be developed to enhance predictive accuracy.
|
|
5. |
- Traykov, Vassil, et al.
(author)
-
Clinical practice and implementation of guidelines for the prevention, diagnosis and management of cardiac implantable electronic device infections : results of a worldwide survey under the auspices of the European Heart Rhythm Association
- 2019
-
In: Europace. - : Oxford University Press. - 1099-5129 .- 1532-2092. ; 21:8, s. 1270-1279
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- AIMS: Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infection rates are increasing. Worldwide compliance and disparities to published guidelines for the prevention, diagnosis and management of these conditions are not well elucidated. The purpose of this survey, therefore, was to clarify these issues through an inquiry to arrhythmia-related associations and societies worldwide.METHODS AND RESULTS: A questionnaire comprising 15 questions related to CIED infections was distributed among members of seven arrhythmia societies worldwide. A total of 234 centres in 62 countries reported implantation rates of which 159 (68.0%) performed more than 200 device implantations per year and 14 (6.0%) performed fewer than 50 implantations per year. The reported rates of CIED infections for 2017 were ≤2% in 78.7% of the centres, while the infection rates exceeded 5% in 7.8% of the centres. Preventive measures for CIED infection differed from published recommendations and varied among different regions mainly in terms of pocket irrigation and administering post-operative antimicrobial therapy the use of which was reported by 39.9% and 44% of the respondents, respectively. Antibacterial envelopes were used by 37.7% of the respondents in selected circumstances. In terms of pocket infection management, 62% of the respondents applied complete system removal as an initial step. Diagnostic pocket needle aspiration and pocket surgical debridement were reported by 15.8% and 11.8% of centres, respectively.CONCLUSION: Clinical practices for prevention and management of CIED do not fully comply with current recommendations and demonstrate considerable regional disparities. Further education and programmes for improved implementation of guidelines are mandatory.
|
|