心律植入装置感染的预防和处理

近些年心律植入装置感染的发生率呈显著上升趋势。应加强术前、术中及术后感染的预防措施，及时正确诊断心律植入装置感染，并根据病情进行抗生素治疗或移除心律植入装置。     

心律植入装置感染拔除后行无导线起搏

目的 观察心律植入装置感染拔除后植入无导线起搏器的临床疗效及安全性。方法 回顾性观察2020年11月至2022年5月,在中国科学技术大学附属第一医院（安徽省立医院）因心律植入装置感染拔除后植入无导线起搏器的患者,分析术中起搏器阈值、感知、阻抗,手术时间、X线曝光时间、曝光量,并发症情况以及随访过程中的临床疗效。结果 共计6例患者,其中男性4例,女性2例,平均年龄71.8岁,其中起搏器囊袋感染5例,感染性心内膜炎1例。其中双腔起搏器5例,单腔起搏器1例,植入起搏器导线4个月到13年不等,共拔除11根电极导线。所有患者均顺利拔除起搏器装置并成功植入无导线起搏器,均植入右室间隔部。术中起搏器参数为：阈值（0.46±0.12）V/0.24ms,感知（8.48±2.46）m V,阻抗（753.3±131.4）Ω,随访3个月起搏器各项参数稳定。拔除及重新植入围手术期及3个月随访过程中,未出现心脏穿孔、静脉血栓、血管损伤、装置功能不良等并发症。结论 心律植入装置感染后拔除再植入无导线起搏器,临床疗效确切,安全性高。     

心律植入装置相关感染性心内膜炎的病因分析

目的探讨心律植入装置相关的感染性心内膜炎的相关病因。方法回顾性分析2011年1月至2018年2月就诊于北京大学人民医院的心律植入装置相关的感染性心内膜炎患者的临床资料。结果 56例发生心律植入装置相关感染性心内膜炎,其中男性44例(78.6%),女性12例(21.4%),年龄(66±13)岁。有囊袋感染清创史的35例(62.5%),有起搏器更换史23例(41.1%),深静脉置管2例(3.6%),糖尿病史11例(19.6%),乙肝病史5例(8.9%),肿瘤史2例(3.6%)。56例中1例患者因重症感染死亡,余55例患者均行电极导线拔除治疗,其中12例为外科拔除。术中发生心脏压塞3例(5.5%),肺栓塞1例(1.8%),再植入患者27例(49.1%),无一例手术相关的死亡病例。结论囊袋感染后保守清创治疗与心律植入装置相关感染性心内膜炎直接相关,一旦明确诊断应行电极导线拔除。     

国内心律植入装置电极导线拔除的概况

对国内心律植入装置电极导线拔除的文献进行归纳或总结。电极导线拔除的原因有1感染;2电极导线断裂脱入心腔引起心律失常;3穿破心肌的电极导线;4精神症状;5体内多根电极导线。电极导线拔除的方法有1血管内反推力牵引法;2直接牵引法或加其他辅助措施;3机械扩张鞘;4体外循环下手术拔除;5杂交手术。拔除的电极导线主要为右室、右房电极导线。经上腔静脉途径拔除的成功率与电极导线植入的时间呈反向关系。拔除的并发症主要为心包压塞,与心房电极导线的拔除相关。还有肺栓塞、三尖瓣撕裂、下肢静脉血栓等并发症的发生。电极导线拔除的关键点为电极导线的头端与心肌的分离,以及电极导线体与血管或组织结构粘连的分离。因此,只要措施恰当,拔除则是安全、有效的,否则,并发症是致命的。     

慢性心脏电极穿孔的识别及处理策略分析

目的 分析和总结心律植入装置植入术后慢性心脏电极穿孔的的识别以及处理策略。方法 对2007年1月至2019年1月于北京大学人民医院诊断慢性心脏电极穿孔并且成功拔除穿孔电极患者的临床资料进行回顾性分析,分析患者临床症状、血流动力学情况、电极拔除情况及并发症等。结果 共入选30例,其中胸痛15例(50.0%),呼吸困难4例(13.3%),肌肉刺激3例(10.0%),意识丧失3例(10.0%),无症状者5例(16.7%);合并心包积液2例(6.7%),伴有周围器官损伤1例(3.3%)。30例术前血流动力学均稳定,收缩压(131.5±15.1)mmHg,舒张压(77.0±9.7)mmHg。经静脉拔除19例(63.3%),经开胸手术成功拔除穿孔电极11例(36.7%)。经静脉拔除患者中,直接拔除3例(10.0%),经锁定钢丝拔除12例(43.3%),经Snare下腔回收装置拔除2例(6.7%),经激光鞘拔除1例(3.3%),术前行心包穿刺并留置猪尾导管4例(13.3%)。1例(3.3%)患者经开胸手术拔除穿孔电极术后出现手术切口感染,予抗感染、伤口换药后愈合良好。结论 对于血流动力学稳定的慢性心...     

经静脉途径拔除植入心律起搏装置器械选择

目的:探讨多器械联合运用在经静脉途径拔除植入心律起搏装置中的安全性和有效性。方法:回顾性分析和总结2017-08-2019-05就诊于我院,应用多器械、综合管理成功治愈植入心律起搏装置感染或导线断裂患者的临床资料。结果:11例植入心律起搏装置患者的18根导线(导线断裂1例、起搏器综合征1例、感染9例)经静脉途径成功拔除,其中3根导线徒手拔除,15根导线运用锁定钢丝和扩张鞘拔除。4例患者运用Evolution机械鞘拔除,1例经下腔静脉途径拔除,2例患者经囊袋清创,加强抗感染后好转;6例患者于对侧植入新的心律起搏装置,3例患者无植入新的起搏装置指征。所有患者未发生严重并发症。结论:植入心律起搏装置科学管理至关重要,严格无菌操作是预防感染相关并发症的关键。综合运用多种器械,个体化制定拔除策略安全高效。     

心律植入装置感染与处理的中国专家共识2013

近年来，治疗心血管病的体内植入装置的种类逐渐增多，并分成两类。一类与心律诊断与治疗相关，包括起搏器、ICD、CRT、植入式Holter等，因其内部都装备了复杂的电路系统而属于电子装置，国外称其为心血管植入电子装置（Cardiacimplantableelectronicdevice，CIED）。另一类为非心律方面的心血管植入装置，包括治疗瓣膜病的“人造瓣膜”，治疗心衰的心脏辅助装置等，被称为心血管非电子植入装置。     

His束起搏电极导线拔除的单中心经验

目的 探讨经静脉拔除His束起搏电极导线的安全性的初步临床经验。方法 连续纳入2019年1月至2022年5月在北京大学人民医院行Medtronic SelectSecure 3830电极导线拔除患者，His束电极导线植入时间>3个月。统计分析His束电极导线拔除的原因及指证、成功率、拔除工具的应用、拔除再植入His束区域的情况。结果 17例His束电极导线拔除患者，其中男性9例(52.9%);年龄(59.5±18.4)岁。电极导线拔除指证：囊袋感染患者13例(76.5%);非感染患者4例(23.5%),其中电极故障2例(11.8%),电极穿孔1例(5.9%),上腔静脉闭塞1例(5.9%)。17例均成功拔除所有电极导线，成功率100%,1例(5.9%)His束电极拔除术中出现脑梗症状。17例中1例有2根His束电极植入，共拔除His束电极导线18根(43.9%),电极植入时间为(19.6±16.5)个月。其中13根(72.2%)His束电极导线通过徒手逆时针旋转拔除，其余5例(27.8%)His束电极导线通过下腔装置拔除。植入时间<12个月的His束电极导线7根(38.9%)...     

经静脉途径拔除植入心律起搏装置导线25例临床体会

目的:回顾性分析和总结经静脉途径拔除植入心律起搏装置(CIED)导线的方法和体会。方法:25例CIED患者(导线断裂3例、感染22例)的47根导线经静脉途径成功拔除,其中6例导线徒手拔除,15例应用锁定钢丝和扩张鞘拔除,1例运用Evolution机械鞘拔除,3例经下腔静脉途径拔除;22例患者于对侧植入新的心律起博装置,2例患者无植入新的起搏装置指证,1例患者因感染性心内膜炎积极治疗无效死亡。结果:所有导线均完全拔除,术中术后均未发生严重并发症。结论:经静脉途径拔除CIED导线是根治心律起博装置导线相关问题的重要措施,科学、有效的运用多种器械和技术在复杂病例的应用中十分重要。     

心脏再同步化治疗起搏器左室电极的拔除与再植入:中国单中心经验

目的探讨心脏再同步化治疗起搏器(CRT/CRTD)患者经静脉途径左室电极拔除与再植入的方法以及相关并发症。方法回顾性分析2012年1月至2018年5月于北京大学人民医院行CRT/CRTD拔除术的患者,分析并总结左室电极拔除与再植入方法、并发症以及成功率。结果共50例(CRT、CRTD分别为33、17例)拔除术患者(起搏器装置感染患者48例、左室电极故障2例)。共拔除左室电极50根(主动固定电极3根,被动电极47根)。左室电极的平均植入时间为55.3个月(1～204个月);左室电极拔除成功率100%(完全拔除94%,临床拔除6%);其中5例(10%)未使用工具徒手拔除,22例(44%)使用锁定钢丝拔除,1例(2%)应用锁定钢丝联合Evolution机械扩张鞘拔除,21例(42%)应用下腔辅助装置抓捕器(Snare)拔除,1例(2%)为内外科杂交手术完成电极拔除。住院期间围手术期死亡1例(死亡率为2%),电极拔除手术主要并发症发生率为2%(1例术后出现急性呼吸衰竭),无次要并发症出现;共34例患者行CRT/CRTD再植入术,其中32例经右锁骨下静脉行左室电极再植入(28例右侧再植入成功),2例左侧成功再植入,左室电极右侧再植入成功率为87.5%,左室电极再植入总的成功率为88.2%。再植入前术中冠状静脉造影显示左室电极拔除后原侧静脉狭窄>50%的患者有15例(44.1%),原侧静脉闭塞3例(8.8%),左室电极拔除后再植入原侧静脉的有21例(61.8%),原有侧静脉狭窄或闭塞再植入选择其他侧静脉10例(29.4%),1例(2.9%)患者应用球囊扩张侧静脉后成功送入左室电极。结论对于CRT/CRTD起搏器植入的患者,拔除心脏装置包括左室电极具有很高的成功率以及较低的并发症发生率,左室电极拔出后再植入总的成功率为88.2%,右侧再植入成功率为87.5%,植入难度较大但具有可行性。     

植入式心脏起搏器与自动转复除颤器感染的发病机制和诊治

心血管植入性电子装置（CIED）感染的发生日见增多,涉及植入物本身和导管感染以及囊袋、心内膜、动静脉软组织及血流感染等类型。这些救命装置感染的发病机制与多因素有关,诊断需要综合局部和全身症状、体征、食道和经胸超声及多途径（组织、分泌物、导管、血液）细菌培养等多方面来决定。治疗的关键策略包括是否需要移除感染的CIED装置、抗感染治疗疗程、是否需要植入新的CIED装置及其植入时机;作者提出了CIED感染的3级预防策略。     

心脏植入电子装置感染的治疗策略分析

目的：评估植入电子装置（CIED）感染的治疗策略。方法回顾性分析本心脏中心1817例植入起搏器和除颤仪患者中出现CIED感染的病例,分析其临床表现和预后,探讨治疗方法。结果发生CIED感染16例（0.88%）,其中起搏器囊袋感染15例（93.75%）。均进行起搏器囊袋清创聚维酮碘浸泡消毒。重置原起搏器于胸大小肌之间9例,复发6例（66.7%）,显著高于取出原起搏器患者（12例,复发率为0）。取出原起搏器和保留起搏导管8例,取出原起搏器和经皮拔除起搏导管4例。无感染和拔管相关的死亡。CIED感染者相关住院次数、住院治疗天数为（2.4＆#177;0.5）次、（41＆#177;18）d,非感染者为（1.0＆#177;0.1）次、（13＆#177;3）d。结论完全移除CIED是成功治疗CIED感染的关键。若无并发导管相关感染,保留导管并不影响患者的预后。     

Extraction of Implantable Cardiac Electronic Devices

With the increasing numbers of cardiac implantable devices in use, lead extraction has become a critical procedure in remedying device-related infections and complications. Lead extraction technology has grown considerably over the past two decades from simple traction maneuvers to the use of powered, telescoping sheaths equipped with laser technology. Data from single center experiences and randomized control trials have continued to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of the most current lead extraction technology. Still, major complications occur in less than 1% of patients. Patient preparation and in-place laboratory protocols are important for the prevention of complications and the rapid diagnosis and treatment of life-threatening complications should they arise.     

Timing of the most recent device procedure influences the clinical outcome of Lead-associated endocarditis

Objectives The purpose of this study was to determine whether the timing of the most recent cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) procedure,either a permanent pacemaker or implantable cardioverterdefibrillator,influences the clinical presentation and outcome of lead-associated endocarditis (LAE).Background The CIED infection rate has increased at a time of increased device use.LAE is associated with significant morbidity and mortality.Methods The clinical presentation and course of LAE were evaluated by the MEDIC (Multicenter Electrophysiologic Device Cohort) registry,an international registry enrolling patients with CIED infection.Consecutive LAE patients enrolled in the Multicenter Electrophysiologic Device Cohort registry between January 2009 and May 2011 were analyzed.The clinical features and outcomes of 2 groups were compared based on the time from the most recent CIED procedure (early,< 6 months;late,> 6 months).Results The Multicenter Electrophysiologic Device Cohort registry entered 145 patients with LAE (early=43,late=102).Early LAE patients presented with signs and symptoms of local pocket infection,whereas a remote source of bacteremia was present in 38 % of patients with late LAE but only 8 % of early LAE (P < 0.01).Staphylococcal species were the most frequent pathogens in both early and late LAE.Treatment consisted of removal of all hardware and intravenous administration of antibiotics.In-hospital mortality was low (early=7 %,late=6 %).Conclusions The clinical presentation of LAE is influenced by the time from the most recent CIED procedure.Although clinical manifestations of pocket infection are present in the majority of patients with early LAE,late LAE should be considered in any CIED patient who presents with fever,bloodstream infection,or signs of sepsis,even if the device pocket appears uninfected.Prompt recognition and management may improve outcomes.     

The effect of a standardised protocol for CIED insertion on complications and infection rates in a DGH

Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED)-related complications and infections typically lead to prolonged hospital stays and, very occasionally, death. A new CIED insertion protocol was implemented in a district general hospital. The primary objective of this study was to determine whether a significant reduction in complication and infection rates occurred after implementation of the new protocol. Medical records were reviewed for patients who had a CIED inserted in the two years pre- and post-protocol implementation, and any complications were identified in a one-year follow-up period.An increase in the complexity of the devices implanted after introduction of the protocol was observed. The number of complications was significantly reduced from 6.86% to 3.95% (p<0.0001). In the two years prior to protocol implementation, 14 of 871 (1.6%) patients suffered a CIED-related infection. In contrast, four of 683 (0.44%) patients suffered a CIEDrelated infection in the two years postimplementation. This was not statistically significant (p=0.093).In conclusion, implementing a standardised protocol for CIED insertion significantly reduced the rate of complications, and also reduced the rate of infection, but this was not statistically significant.Key words: cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED), device infection, pacemaker-related infection, pacemaker complications     

终末期患者心脏植入型电子器械的缓和医疗现状及临床管理

心脏植入型电子器械(CIED)包括起搏器、植入型心律转复除颤器(ICD)和心脏再同步化治疗(CRT)等。随着人口老龄化的增加及CIED植入适应证范围的逐渐扩大,CIED植入量逐年增加。但对于临床终末期患者,ICD或CRT联合ICD不但不能延长患者的生存期,反复的电除颤可能会给患者带来严重痛苦。临终患者CIED的管理成为影响终末期患者生存质量的重要问题,现就临终患者CIED的缓和医疗现状和临床管理决策中的影响因素以及临床处理策略展开综述。     

Hands on: How to approach patients undergoing lead extraction

Due to the growing number of patients treated with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) there is an increased need for lead management, evaluation, and extraction. While CIED lead extraction has many indications, a consistent approach to preprocedural planning should be applied in all cases, including a thorough consultation with careful review of the patient's medical and device history, as well as a discussion of informed consent and shared decision‐making with the patient and their loved ones. The use of chest X‐ray, echocardiography, and computed tomography (CT) scan can further help with risk stratification and procedural planning. Intraprocedural echocardiography (transesophageal or intracardiac) is recommended and allows early recognition of cardiothoracic injury. Establishing an extraction team with cardiology/electrophysiology, anesthesiology, and CT surgery is is crucial to a successful and safe CIED extraction practice, including immediately available surgical backup. This hands‐on review will address how to approach patients who are undergoing lead extraction, as well as several innovations in preprocedure and intraprocedural risk assessment.     

Current trends in the management of cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infections

Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infections are an emerging clinical problem. A growing number of dedicated and high quality clinical studies are currently being generated. We here review the most recent advances in the diagnosis and treatment of patients with CIED infection including intracardiac lead endocarditis. We discuss the current etiology and risk factors, and appraise the major diagnostic issues, describing our center’s therapeutic approach. We also address the management of CIED infection complications.     

口服抗凝药所致心血管植入型电子器械囊袋迟发性血肿的临床特征和处理策略

目的探讨口服抗凝药导致的心血管植入型电子器械(cardiovascular implantable electronic device,CIED)迟发性血肿的临床特点和处理策略。方法回顾性分析了2017年1月至2018年7月在中南大学湘雅二医院及湘雅三医院植入CIED 841例患者,定义迟发性囊袋血肿为植入装置后5 d以后发生的囊袋血肿,采集其临床资料并分析其处理策略。结果在植入后(12.0±8.8)个月的随访期,共发生囊袋血肿9例,发生率为1.1%,其中迟发性囊袋血肿5例,发生率为0.6%。2例经过加压包扎保守治疗痊愈,2例经过囊袋血肿清除术后痊愈,1例血肿抽吸并保守治疗的患者后期出现囊袋破溃并感染,经装置移除并重新植入后痊愈,无死亡病例。因本研究为小样本描述性研究,未行统计学分析。迟发性囊袋血肿特点为患者正在接受抗凝药治疗,无明显全身或局部炎症反应,囊袋积液镜检及培养无细菌检出,局部组织无明显炎症破坏,经血肿清除术或保守治疗后囊袋积液迅速吸收。结论CIED植入后可能会发生迟发性血肿,发生原因可能和抗凝药使用以及监测不够规范相关。根据其临床特点可以和感染性积液鉴别,通过血肿清除术或保守治疗多数患者预后良好。     

Impact of Chronic Kidney Disease on Short-Term Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Related Infection: A Nationwide Population-Based Cohort Study

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) increased the incident cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infection, but risk factors of CIED infection in CKD patients remain unclear.Patients who received new CIED implantation between January 1, 1997 and December 31, 2011 were selected from the Taiwan National Health Insurance Database and were divided into 3 groups: patients with normal renal function, CKD patients without dialysis, and CKD patient with dialysis. Two outcomes, CIED infection during index hospitalization and within 1 year after discharge, were evaluated.This study included 38,354 patients, 35,060 patients in normal renal function group, 1927 patients in CKD without dialysis group, and 1367 patients in CKD with dialysis group. CKD patients without dialysis (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.14, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.32-3.46) and CKD patients with dialysis (aOR, 3.78, 95% CI, 2.37-6.02) increased incident CIED infection during index hospitalization compared to patients with normal renal function. Use of steroid (aOR: 2.74, 95% CI, 1.08-6.98) increased the risk of CIED infection in CKD patients without dialysis while chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (aOR: 2.76, 95% CI, 1.06-7.16) increased the risk of CIED infection in CKD patient with dialysis during index hospitalization.CKD is a risk of CIED infection during index hospitalization. Use of steroid and COPD are important risks factors for CIED infection in CKD patients.