Risk factor analysis of permanent pacemaker infection

Muhammad R. Sohail, Daniel Z. Uslan, Akbar H. Khan, Paul Andrew Friedman, David L. Hayes, Walter R. Wilson, James M. Steckelberg, Sarah M. Stoner, Larry M. Baddour

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

204 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background. Several host- and procedure-related factors have been reported to increase the risk of permanent pacemaker (PPM) infection on the basis of descriptive analyses of case series. The purpose of this study is to assess the risk factors for PPM infection using case-control study methods. Methods. All patients who had a PPM implanted at our institution from January 1991 to December 2003 were retrospectively reviewed. Each patient who experienced a PPM infection was matched with 2 control subjects by age, sex, year of implantation, and duration of follow-up. Univariate and multivariable analyses were performed to identify significant risk factors for PPM infection. Results. Twenty-nine case patients and 58 control subjects met inclusion criteria. The majority (83%) of case patients presented with a pocket infection; a minority (10%) had PPM-related endocarditis. Staphylococcus species (69%) were the most common pathogens. On univariate analysis, previous PPM infection, malignancy, long-term corticosteroid use, multiple device revisions, a permanent central venous catheter, the presence of >2 pacing leads, and a lack of antibiotic prophylaxis at the time of PPM placement were associated with an increased risk of PPM infection. A multivariable logistic regression model identified long-term corticosteroid use (odds ratio [OR], 13.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.27-151.7; P = .03) and the presence of >2 pacing leads versus 2 leads (OR, 5.41; 95% CI, 1.44-20.29; P = .01) as independent risk factors for PPM infection. In contrast, use of antibiotic prophylaxis prior to PPM implantation had a protective effect (OR, 0.087; 95% CI, 0.016-0.48; P = .005). Conclusions. These findings should assist clinicians in identifying patients who are at increased risk of PPM infection, as well as in developing strategies to minimize the modifiable risks.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)166-173
Number of pages8
JournalClinical Infectious Diseases
Volume45
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 15 2007

Fingerprint

Statistical Factor Analysis
Infection
Antibiotic Prophylaxis
Odds Ratio
Confidence Intervals
Adrenal Cortex Hormones
Logistic Models
Central Venous Catheters
Endocarditis
Staphylococcus
Case-Control Studies
Equipment and Supplies
Neoplasms

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Immunology
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Sohail, M. R., Uslan, D. Z., Khan, A. H., Friedman, P. A., Hayes, D. L., Wilson, W. R., ... Baddour, L. M. (2007). Risk factor analysis of permanent pacemaker infection. Clinical Infectious Diseases, 45(2), 166-173. https://doi.org/10.1086/518889

Risk factor analysis of permanent pacemaker infection. / Sohail, Muhammad R.; Uslan, Daniel Z.; Khan, Akbar H.; Friedman, Paul Andrew; Hayes, David L.; Wilson, Walter R.; Steckelberg, James M.; Stoner, Sarah M.; Baddour, Larry M.

In: Clinical Infectious Diseases, Vol. 45, No. 2, 15.07.2007, p. 166-173.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Sohail, MR, Uslan, DZ, Khan, AH, Friedman, PA, Hayes, DL, Wilson, WR, Steckelberg, JM, Stoner, SM & Baddour, LM 2007, 'Risk factor analysis of permanent pacemaker infection', Clinical Infectious Diseases, vol. 45, no. 2, pp. 166-173. https://doi.org/10.1086/518889
Sohail MR, Uslan DZ, Khan AH, Friedman PA, Hayes DL, Wilson WR et al. Risk factor analysis of permanent pacemaker infection. Clinical Infectious Diseases. 2007 Jul 15;45(2):166-173. https://doi.org/10.1086/518889
Sohail, Muhammad R. ; Uslan, Daniel Z. ; Khan, Akbar H. ; Friedman, Paul Andrew ; Hayes, David L. ; Wilson, Walter R. ; Steckelberg, James M. ; Stoner, Sarah M. ; Baddour, Larry M. / Risk factor analysis of permanent pacemaker infection. In: Clinical Infectious Diseases. 2007 ; Vol. 45, No. 2. pp. 166-173.
@article{507dc65914c544649d953cb83d0e3017,
title = "Risk factor analysis of permanent pacemaker infection",
abstract = "Background. Several host- and procedure-related factors have been reported to increase the risk of permanent pacemaker (PPM) infection on the basis of descriptive analyses of case series. The purpose of this study is to assess the risk factors for PPM infection using case-control study methods. Methods. All patients who had a PPM implanted at our institution from January 1991 to December 2003 were retrospectively reviewed. Each patient who experienced a PPM infection was matched with 2 control subjects by age, sex, year of implantation, and duration of follow-up. Univariate and multivariable analyses were performed to identify significant risk factors for PPM infection. Results. Twenty-nine case patients and 58 control subjects met inclusion criteria. The majority (83{\%}) of case patients presented with a pocket infection; a minority (10{\%}) had PPM-related endocarditis. Staphylococcus species (69{\%}) were the most common pathogens. On univariate analysis, previous PPM infection, malignancy, long-term corticosteroid use, multiple device revisions, a permanent central venous catheter, the presence of >2 pacing leads, and a lack of antibiotic prophylaxis at the time of PPM placement were associated with an increased risk of PPM infection. A multivariable logistic regression model identified long-term corticosteroid use (odds ratio [OR], 13.90; 95{\%} confidence interval [CI], 1.27-151.7; P = .03) and the presence of >2 pacing leads versus 2 leads (OR, 5.41; 95{\%} CI, 1.44-20.29; P = .01) as independent risk factors for PPM infection. In contrast, use of antibiotic prophylaxis prior to PPM implantation had a protective effect (OR, 0.087; 95{\%} CI, 0.016-0.48; P = .005). Conclusions. These findings should assist clinicians in identifying patients who are at increased risk of PPM infection, as well as in developing strategies to minimize the modifiable risks.",
author = "Sohail, {Muhammad R.} and Uslan, {Daniel Z.} and Khan, {Akbar H.} and Friedman, {Paul Andrew} and Hayes, {David L.} and Wilson, {Walter R.} and Steckelberg, {James M.} and Stoner, {Sarah M.} and Baddour, {Larry M.}",
year = "2007",
month = "7",
day = "15",
doi = "10.1086/518889",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "45",
pages = "166--173",
journal = "Clinical Infectious Diseases",
issn = "1058-4838",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Risk factor analysis of permanent pacemaker infection

AU - Sohail, Muhammad R.

AU - Uslan, Daniel Z.

AU - Khan, Akbar H.

AU - Friedman, Paul Andrew

AU - Hayes, David L.

AU - Wilson, Walter R.

AU - Steckelberg, James M.

AU - Stoner, Sarah M.

AU - Baddour, Larry M.

PY - 2007/7/15

Y1 - 2007/7/15

N2 - Background. Several host- and procedure-related factors have been reported to increase the risk of permanent pacemaker (PPM) infection on the basis of descriptive analyses of case series. The purpose of this study is to assess the risk factors for PPM infection using case-control study methods. Methods. All patients who had a PPM implanted at our institution from January 1991 to December 2003 were retrospectively reviewed. Each patient who experienced a PPM infection was matched with 2 control subjects by age, sex, year of implantation, and duration of follow-up. Univariate and multivariable analyses were performed to identify significant risk factors for PPM infection. Results. Twenty-nine case patients and 58 control subjects met inclusion criteria. The majority (83%) of case patients presented with a pocket infection; a minority (10%) had PPM-related endocarditis. Staphylococcus species (69%) were the most common pathogens. On univariate analysis, previous PPM infection, malignancy, long-term corticosteroid use, multiple device revisions, a permanent central venous catheter, the presence of >2 pacing leads, and a lack of antibiotic prophylaxis at the time of PPM placement were associated with an increased risk of PPM infection. A multivariable logistic regression model identified long-term corticosteroid use (odds ratio [OR], 13.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.27-151.7; P = .03) and the presence of >2 pacing leads versus 2 leads (OR, 5.41; 95% CI, 1.44-20.29; P = .01) as independent risk factors for PPM infection. In contrast, use of antibiotic prophylaxis prior to PPM implantation had a protective effect (OR, 0.087; 95% CI, 0.016-0.48; P = .005). Conclusions. These findings should assist clinicians in identifying patients who are at increased risk of PPM infection, as well as in developing strategies to minimize the modifiable risks.

AB - Background. Several host- and procedure-related factors have been reported to increase the risk of permanent pacemaker (PPM) infection on the basis of descriptive analyses of case series. The purpose of this study is to assess the risk factors for PPM infection using case-control study methods. Methods. All patients who had a PPM implanted at our institution from January 1991 to December 2003 were retrospectively reviewed. Each patient who experienced a PPM infection was matched with 2 control subjects by age, sex, year of implantation, and duration of follow-up. Univariate and multivariable analyses were performed to identify significant risk factors for PPM infection. Results. Twenty-nine case patients and 58 control subjects met inclusion criteria. The majority (83%) of case patients presented with a pocket infection; a minority (10%) had PPM-related endocarditis. Staphylococcus species (69%) were the most common pathogens. On univariate analysis, previous PPM infection, malignancy, long-term corticosteroid use, multiple device revisions, a permanent central venous catheter, the presence of >2 pacing leads, and a lack of antibiotic prophylaxis at the time of PPM placement were associated with an increased risk of PPM infection. A multivariable logistic regression model identified long-term corticosteroid use (odds ratio [OR], 13.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.27-151.7; P = .03) and the presence of >2 pacing leads versus 2 leads (OR, 5.41; 95% CI, 1.44-20.29; P = .01) as independent risk factors for PPM infection. In contrast, use of antibiotic prophylaxis prior to PPM implantation had a protective effect (OR, 0.087; 95% CI, 0.016-0.48; P = .005). Conclusions. These findings should assist clinicians in identifying patients who are at increased risk of PPM infection, as well as in developing strategies to minimize the modifiable risks.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34447109046&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34447109046&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1086/518889

DO - 10.1086/518889

M3 - Article

C2 - 17578774

AN - SCOPUS:34447109046

VL - 45

SP - 166

EP - 173

JO - Clinical Infectious Diseases

JF - Clinical Infectious Diseases

SN - 1058-4838

IS - 2

ER -