Israel Medical Association Journal

Background: Cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) with endocardial leads crossing the tricuspid valve can lead to or worsen tricuspid regurgitation (TR), causing substantial morbidity and mortality. Despite a recent randomized controlled study revealing a low short-term incidence of device-related TR (DRT) post-CIED implantation, uncertainties persist regarding the efficacy of intra-procedural 2-dimensional transthoracic echocardiography (2DTTE) in preventing long-term TR.

Objectives: To conduct a long-term follow-up study on patients with CIED implants based on a previous study conducted at our hospital.

Methods: In a retrospective study at Assuta Ashdod Medical Center (2018–2019), patients undergoing de-novo CIED implantation with (n=39, group 1) or without (n=51, group 2) intra-procedural 2DTTE were analyzed. Clinical, demographic, and long-term (> 1 year) echocardiographic data were collected and compared.

Results: The study included 90 patients (mean age 72.3 ± 11.0 years, 63% male, 23% ICD, 50% active leads, follow-up 32.8 ± 11 months). TR aggravation was found in 25% of patients (13 in group 1, 10 in group 2), with no statistical difference between groups. Multivariate analysis identified a history of atrial fibrillation (AF) as the sole significant factor in long-term TR deterioration (OR=3.44, 95%CI 1.13–10.43, P = 0.029). Other clinical, demographic, echocardiographic, and device-related factors did not significantly contribute to long-term DRT.

Conclusions: After one-year post-CIED implantation, the incidence of DRT significantly increases. Intra-procedural 2DTTE does not effectively reduce long-term DRT, suggesting that implantation-related mechanisms are less likely the primary cause. AF likely plays a major role in the pathogenesis of long-term TR in this subset post-CIED implantation.

Background: Cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) are associated with risks of device-related infections (DRI) impacting major adverse outcomes. Staphylococcus aureus (SA) is a leading cause of early pocket infection and bacteremia. While studies in other surgical contexts have suggested that nasal mupirocin treatment and chlorhexidine skin washing may reduce colonization and infection risk, limited data exist for CIED interventions.

Objectives: To assess the impact of SA decolonization on DRI rates.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective, single-center observational study on consecutive patients undergoing CIED interventions (March 2020–March 2022). All patients received pre-procedure antibiotics and chlorhexidine skin washing. Starting in March 2021, additional pre-treatment with mupirocin for SA decolonization was administered. DRI rates within 6 months post-implantation were compared between patients treated according to guidelines (Group 1) and those receiving mupirocin in addition to the recommended guidelines (Group 2).

Results: The study comprised 276 patients (age 77 ± 10 years; 60% male). DRI occurred in five patients (1.8%);80% underwent cardiac resynchronization therapy procedures. In Group 1 (n=177), four patients (2.2%) experienced DRI 11–48 days post-procedure; three with pocket infection (two with negative cultures and one with local Pseudomonas) and one with methicillin-sensitive SA endocarditis necessitating device extraction. In Group 2 (n=99), only one patient (1%) had DRI (Strep. dysgalactiae endocarditis) 135 days post-procedure (P = NS).

Conclusions: The routine decolonization of SA with mupirocin, in addition to guideline-directed protocols, did not significantly affect DRI rates. Larger prospective studies are needed to evaluate the preventive role of routine SA decolonization in CIED procedures.

Background: Existing cardiac disease contributes to poor outcome in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Little information exists regarding COVID-19 infection in patients with a cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED).

Objectives: To assess the association between CIEDs and severity of COVID-19 infection.

Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis including 13,000 patients > 18 years old with COVID-19 infection between January and December 2020. Patients with COVID-19 who had a permanent pacemaker or defibrillator were matched 1:4 based on age and sex followed by univariate and multivariate analyses. Baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes were assessed.

Results: Forty patients with CIED and 160 patients without CIED were included in the current analysis. Mean age was 72.6 ± 13 years, and approximately 50% were females. Majority of the patients in the study arm had a pacemaker (63%), whereas only 15 patients (37%) had a defibrillator. Patients with COVID-19 and CIED presented more often with atrial fibrillation, coronary artery disease, heart failure, hypertension, diabetes, and chronic kidney disease. They were more likely to be hospitalized in the intensive care unit (ICU) and required more ventilatory support (35% vs. 18.3%). Thirty-day mortality (22.5% vs. 13.8%) and 1-year mortality (25% vs. 15%) were higher among patients with COVID-19 and CIED.

Conclusions: Patients with COVID-19 and CIED had a significantly higher prevalence of co-morbidities that were associated with increased mortality. Although,CIED by itself was not found as an independent risk factor for morbidity and mortality, it may serve as a warning for severe illness with COVID-19.

Background: Endocardial leads of permanent pacemakers (PPM) and implantable defibrillators (ICD) across the tricuspid valve (TV) can lead to tricuspid regurgitation (TR) or can worsen existing TR with subsequent severe morbidity and mortality.

Objectives: To evaluate prospectively the efficacy of intraprocedural 2-dimentional-transthoracic echocardiography (2DTTE) in reducing/preventing lead-associated TR.

Methods: We conducted a prospective randomized controlled study comparing echocardiographic results in patients undergoing de-novo PPM/ICD implantation with intraprocedural echo-guided right ventricular (RV) lead placement (Group 1, n=56) versus non-echo guided implantation (Group 2, n=55). Lead position was changed if TR grade was more than baseline in Group 1. Cohort patients underwent 2DTTE at baseline and 3 and/or 6 months after implantation. Excluded were patients with baseline TR > moderate or baseline ≥ moderate RV dysfunction.

Results: The study comprised 111 patients (74.14 ± 11 years of age, 58.6% male, 19% ICD, 42% active leads). In 98 patients there was at least one follow-up echo. Two patients from Group 1 (3.6%) needed intraprocedural RV electrode repositioning. Four patients (3.5%, 2 from each group, all dual chamber PPM, 3 atrial fibrillation, 2 RV pacing > 40%, none with intraprocedural reposition) had TR deterioration during 6 months follow-up. One patient from Group 2 with baseline mild-moderate aortic regurgitation (AR) had worsening TR and AR within 3 months and underwent aortic valve replacement and TV repair.

Conclusions: The rate of mechanically induced lead-associated TR is low; thus, a routine intraprocedural 2DTTE does not have a significant role in reducing/preventing it

Background: Patients with right bundle branch block (RBBB) prior to transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) are at high risk for immediate post-procedural heart block and long-term mortality when discharged without a pacemaker.

Objectives: To test whether prophylactic permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) is beneficial.

Methods: Of 795 consecutive patients who underwent TAVI, 90 patients had baseline RBBB. We compared characteristics and outcomes of the prophylactic PPI with post-TAVI PPI. Need for pacing was defined as  greater than 1% ventricular pacing.

Results: Forty patients with RBBB received a prophylactic PPI (group 1), and in 50 the decision was based on standard post-procedural indications (group 2). There were no significant differences in clinical baseline characteristics. One patient developed a tamponade after a PPI post-TAVI. A trend toward shorter hospitalization duration in group 1 patients was observed (P = 0.06). On long-term follow-up of 848 ± 56 days, no differences were found in overall survival (P = 0.77), the composite event-free survival of both mortality and hospitalizations (P = 0.66), or mortality and syncope (P = 0.65). On multivariate analysis, independent predictors of the need for pacing included baseline PR interval increase of 10ms (odds ratio [OR] 1.21 per 10 ms increment 95% confidence interval [95%CI] 1.02–1.44, P = 0.028), and the use of new generation valves (OR 3.92, 95%CI 1.23–12.46, P = 0.023).

Conclusions: In patients with baseline pre-TAVI RBBB, no outcome differences were found with prophylactic PPI. On multivariate analysis, predictors of the need for pacing included baseline long PR interval, and the use of newer generation valves.