AIMS: Cardiac device-related infective endocarditis (CDRIE) is a severe complication of cardiac device (CD) implantation and is usually treated by antibiotic therapy and percutaneous device extraction. Few studies report the management and prognosis of CDRIE in real life. In particular, the rate of device extraction in clinical practice and the management of patients with left heart infective endocarditis (LHIE) and an apparently non-infected CD (LHIE+CDRIE-) are not well described. METHODS AND RESULTS: We sought to study in EURO-ENDO, the characteristics, prognosis, and management of 483 patients with a CD included in the European Society of Cardiology EurObservational Research Programme EURO-ENDO registry. Three populations were compared: 280 isolated CDRIE (66.7 ± 14.3 years), 157 patients with LHIE and an apparently non-infected CD (LHIE+CDRIE-) (71.1 ± 13.6), and 46 patients with both LHIE and CDRIE (LHIE+CDRIE+) (70.2 ± 10.1). Echocardiography was not always transoesophageal echography (TOE); it was transthoracic echography (TTE) for isolated CDRIE in 88.4% (TOE = 67.6%), for LHIE+CDRIE- TTE = 93.0% (TOE = 58.6%), and for CDRIE+LHIE+ TTE = 87.0% (TOE = 63.0%). Nuclear imaging was performed in 135 patients (positive for 75.6%). In-hospital mortality was lower in isolated CDRIE 13.2% vs. 22.3% and 30.4% for LHIE+CDRIE- and LHIE+CDRIE+ (P = 0004). Device extraction was performed in 62.1% patients with isolated CDRIE, 10.2% of LHIE+CDRIE- patients, and 45.7% of CDRIE+LHIE+ patients. Device extraction was associated with a better prognosis [hazard ratio 0.59 (0.40-0.87), P = 0.0068] even in the LHIE+CDRIE- group (P = 0.047). CONCLUSION: Prognosis of endocarditis in patients with a CD remains poor, particularly in the presence of an associated LHIE. Although recommended by guidelines, device extraction is not always performed. Device removal was associated with better prognosis, even in the LHIE+CDRIE- group.

• Klíčová slova
• Cardiac device, Implantable defibrillator, Infective endocarditis, Pacemaker, Prognosis, staphylococci,
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH

BACKGROUND: The Heart Team approach has become an integral part of modern cardiovascular medicine. To evaluate current opinions and real-world practice among lead extraction practitioners, an online survey was created and distributed among a pool of lead extraction specialists participating in the International Lead Extraction Expert Meeting (ILEEM) 2018. METHODS: The online survey consisted of 10 questions and was performed using an online survey tool (www.surveymonkey.com). The collector link was sent to 48 lead extraction experts via email. RESULTS: A total of 43 answers were collected (89% return rate) from lead extraction experts in 16 different countries. A great majority (83.7%) of the respondents performed more than 30 lead extraction procedures per year. The most common procedural environment in this survey was the hybrid operating room (67.4%). Most procedures were performed by electrophysiologists and cardiologists (80.9%). Important additional members of the current lead extraction teams were cardiac surgeons (79.1%), anesthesiologists (95.3%) and operating room scrub nurses (76.7%). An extended Heart Team is regarded beneficial for patient care by 86.0%, with potential further members being infectious diseases specialists, intensivists and radiologists. Team training activities are performed in 48.8% of participating centers. CONCLUSIONS: This survey supports the importance of establishing lead extraction Heart Teams in specialized lead extraction centers to potentially improve patient outcomes. The concept of a core and an extended Heart Team approach in lead extraction procedures is introduced.

• Klíčová slova
• Heart Team, ICD, lead extraction, pacemaker, team training,
• MeSH
• kardiologové * MeSH
• lékaři * MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• průzkumy a dotazníky MeSH
• týmová péče o pacienty MeSH
• Check Tag
• lidé MeSH
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH