dc.contributorMora Pabón, Guillermo
dc.contributorRojas Ruiz Ingrid Tatiana
dc.contributorGarcía Moncayo, Andrea Lorena
dc.creatorBastidas Narváez, Andrea Milena
dc.date.accessioned2022-08-18T16:37:41Z
dc.date.available2022-08-18T16:37:41Z
dc.date.created2022-08-18T16:37:41Z
dc.date.issued2022-08-15
dc.identifierhttps://repositorio.unal.edu.co/handle/unal/81950
dc.identifierUniversidad Nacional de Colombia
dc.identifierRepositorio Institucional Universidad Nacional de Colombia
dc.identifierhttps://repositorio.unal.edu.co/
dc.description.abstractIntroducción. Actualmente, los dispositivos electrónicos cardiovasculares implantables se convirtieron en el pilar fundamental del tratamiento de pacientes con arritmias, sin embargo, una de las complicaciones asociadas a su uso consiste la infección, su presencia es equivalente a mayor morbilidad y mortalidad. El objetivo principal de este estudio es evaluar el desempeño pronóstico del score PADIT, escala diseñada para identificar a pacientes con riesgo de infección. Métodos. Se realizó un estudio observacional con componente analítico de cohorte retrospectiva en pacientes atendidos en los últimos 6 años en el servicio de electrofisiología. En el Hospital Universitario Clínica San Rafael se atendieron 3745 pacientes portadores de dispositivos electrónicos implantables cardiacos en el periodo descrito. En el estudio se recogió datos de 1780 pacientes, teniendo en cuenta los criterios de inclusión y exclusión. Resultados. De los pacientes incluidos 953 (54%) fueron de género masculino y 827 (46%) de femenino, la edad predominante fue mayor de 69 años; se encontraron diferentes variables relacionadas con infección, como la edad (p=0,01), el antecedente de insuficiencia cardiaca (p=0,007), el ingreso hospitalario reciente (p=0,000), el tipo de intervención (p=0,013), entre otros. Al realizar el índice de Youden, se encontró con un índice de confianza del 95%, que el score PADIT tiene un área bajo la curva mayor a 0,5 en las tres puntuaciones de riesgo (bajo, moderado y alto). Conclusiones. Se concluye que el score PADIT tiene desempeño regular en la predicción de infección en la población analizada. (Texto tomado de la fuente)
dc.description.abstractIntroduction. Currently, implantable cardiovascular electronic devices have become the mainstay of treatment for patients with arrhythmias, however, one of the complications associated with their use is infection, their presence is equivalent to increased morbidity and mortality. The main objective of this study is to evaluate the prognostic performance of the PADIT score, a scale designed to identify patients at risk of infection. Methods. An observational study with an analytical component of a retrospective cohort was carried out in patients treated in the last 6 years in the electrophysiology service. At the Hospital Universitario Clinical San Rafael, 3,745 patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices were treated in the period described. The study collected data from 1,780 patients, taking into account the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Results. Of the patients included, 953 (54%) were male and 827 (46%) female, the predominant age was over 69 years; different variables related to infection were found, such as age (p=0.01), history of heart failure (p=0.007), recent hospital admission (p=0.000), type of intervention (p=0.013), among others. When performing the Youden index, it was found with a confidence index of 95%, that the PADIT score has an area under the curve greater than 0.5 in the three risk scores (low, moderate and high). Conclusions. It is concluded that the PADIT score has regular performance in predicting infection in the analyzed population.
dc.languagespa
dc.publisherUniversidad Nacional de Colombia
dc.publisherBogotá - Medicina - Especialidad en Medicina Interna
dc.publisherDepartamento de Medicina Interna
dc.publisherFacultad de Medicina
dc.publisherBogotá, Colombia
dc.publisherUniversidad Nacional de Colombia - Sede Bogotá
dc.relationRedCol
dc.relationLaReferencia
dc.relationArber N, P. E. (1994). Pacemaker endocarditis. Report of 44 cases and review of the literature. Medicine (Baltimore) , 73:299
dc.relationBaddour Larry M., A. E. (2010). Update on Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Device Infections and Their Management. Circulation, 121:458–477
dc.relationBaddour LM, C. Y. (2012). Clinical practice. Infections of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices. N Engl J Med , 367:842
dc.relationBaddour LM, W. W. (2005). Infections of prosthetic valves and intravascular devices. Principles and Practice of Infectious Diseases, 6th ed, Mandell GL, Bennett JE, Dolin R (Eds), Churchill Livingstone, Philadelphia , 102
dc.relationBongiorni MG, B. H. (2018). ESC Scientific Document Group. 2018 EHRA expert consensus statement on lead extraction: recommendations on definitions, endpoints, research trial design, and data collection requirements for clinical scientific studies and registries: endorsed by APHRS/HR. Europace , 20: 1217–1217
dc.relationC., D. D. (2018). Approach to Diagnosis of Cardiovascular Implantable-Electronic-Device Infection. Journal of Clinical Microbiology, volume 56, Issue 7
dc.relationCacoub P, L. P. (1998). Pacemaker infective endocarditis. . Am J Cardiol , 82:480.
dc.relationCarina, B.-L. (2020). European Heart RhythmAssociation (EHRA) international consensus document on how to prevent, diagnose, and treat cardiac implantable electronic device infections. European Heart Journal, 41, 2012–2032.
dc.relationChua JD, W. B. (2000). Diagnosis and management of infections involving implantable electrophysiologic cardiac devices. Ann Intern Med, 133:604
dc.relationDa Costa A, L. H. (1998). Role of the preaxillary flora in pacemaker infections. Circulation, 97:1791–1795
dc.relationDai M, C. C. (2019). Trends of Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Device Infection in 3 Decades: A Population-Based Study. JACC Clin Electrophysiol, 5:1071
dc.relationDarouiche RO, W. M. (2010 ). Chlorhexidine-Alcohol versus Povidone-Iodine for Surgical-Site Antisepsis. N Engl J Med, 362(1):18-26
dc.relationDeSimone DC, S. M. (2019). Contemporary management of cardiac implantable electronic device infection. Heart , 105:961
dc.relationDuval X, S.-S. C. (2004). Endocarditis in patients with a permanent pacemaker: a 1-year epidemiological survey on infective endocarditis due to valvular and/or pacemaker infection. Clin Infect Dis , 39:68
dc.relationEggimann P, W. F. (2000). Pacemaker and defibrillator infections. In: Infections Associated with Indwelling Medical Devices, Waldvogel FA, Bisno AL (Eds). American Society for Microbiology Press, 247
dc.relationErba PA, L. P. (2018). Recommendations on nuclear and multimodality imaging in IE and CIED infections. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging , 45:1795–1815
dc.relationEsquer Garrigos Z, S. M.-Q. (2020). Molecular Approach to Diagnosis of Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Device Infection. . Clin Infect Dis , 70:898
dc.relationFozia Z Ahmed, 1. C.-L., & Bloom, H. (2021). Use of healthcare claims to validate the Prevention of Arrhythmia Device Infection Trial cardiac implantable electronic device infection risk score. Europace, 23(9): 1446–1455
dc.relationGreenspon AJ, P. J. (2011). 16-year trends in the infection burden for pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in the United States 1993 to 2008. J Am Coll Cardiol, 58:1001
dc.relationH, B. D. (2019). Risk Factors for Infections Involving Cardiac Implanted Electronic Devices. Journal of the American College of Cardiology, Volume 74, Issue 23, Pages 2845-2854
dc.relationHabib G, L. P. (2015). ESC Scientific Document Group. 2015 ESC Guidelines for the management of infective endocarditis: the Task Force for the Management of Infective Endocarditis of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Endorsed by: european Association for Cardio-Thoracic. Eur Heart J , 36:3075–3128
dc.relationHossein Sadeghi, M. (2018). New Insights into Predictors of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Infection. Tex Heart Inst J, 45(3): 128–135
dc.relationHui-Chen Han, H. N. (2021). Epidemiology of cardiac implantable electronic device infections: incidence and risk factors. Europace, 23, iv3–iv10
dc.relationHussein AA, B. Y. (2016). Microbiology of cardiac implantable electronic device infections. . JACC Clin Electrophysiol , 2:498–505
dc.relationJN, C. (1994). Pathology of cardiac pacemakers and central catheters. . Curr Top Pathol , 86:199
dc.relationJorge, C.-P. (2019). Proposal for a Novel Score to Determine the Risk of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Infection. Rev Esp Cardiol, Volume 72, Issue 10, Pages 806-812
dc.relationJoy PS, K. G. (2017). Cardiac implantable electronic device infections: Who is at greatest risk? Heart Rhythm, 14:839
dc.relationKlug D, B. M. (2007). Risk factors related to infections of implanted pacemakers and cardioverter-defibrillators: results of a large prospective study. Circulation, 116:1349
dc.relationKlug D, L. D. (1997). Systemic infection related to endocarditis on pacemaker leads: clinical presentation and management. Circulation, 95:2098
dc.relationKnigina L, K. C. (2010). Treatment of patients with recurrent or persistent infection of cardiac implantable electronic devices. . Europace , 12:1275–1281
dc.relationKrahn Andrew D., Y. L. (2018 ). Prevention of Arrhythmia Device Infection Trial: The PADIT Trial. J Am Coll Cardiol, 72 (24) 3098–3109
dc.relationKusumoto FM, S. M.-G. (2017). 2017 HRS expert consensus statement on cardiovascular implantable electronic device lead management and extraction. Heart Rhythm , 14:e503–e551
dc.relationKusumoto Fred M, M. H. (2019). Bradycardia Clinical Practice Guidelines. Circulation, 140:e382–e482
dc.relationLe KY, S. M. (2011). Impact of timing of device removal on mortality in patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic device infections. Heart Rhythm, 8:1678
dc.relationLebeaux D, F. ́.-H.-M. (2014). Management of infections related to totally implantable venous access ports: challenges and perspectives. Lancet Infect Dis , 14:146–159
dc.relationLi JS, S. D. (2000). Proposed modifications to the duke criteria for the diagnosis of infective endocarditis. Clin Infect Dis , 30:633–638
dc.relationM, S. M. (2019). Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Therapy: Permanent Pacemakers, Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators, and Cardiac Resynchronization Devices. Med Clin North Am, 103(5):931-943
dc.relationMittal Suneet, S. R. (2014 ). Cardiac implantable electronic device infections: incidence, risk factors, and the effect of the AigisRx antibacterial envelope. Heart Rhythm, 11(4):595-601
dc.relationMorishita A, S. T. (2001). Treatment strategy for infections in patients with permanent pacemakers. Journal of Artificial Organs. , 4:193-7
dc.relationMuhammad Irfan, I. K. (2020). Delays in Temporary and Permanent Pacemakers: Causes and In-Hospital Outcomes. Cureus, 12(2): e6953
dc.relationMulpuru SK, P. V.-G. (2013). Device infections: management and indications for lead extraction. Circulation , 128:1031
dc.relationNagpal A, P. R.-Q. (2015). Usefulness of sonication of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices to enhance microbial detection. Am J Cardiol , 115:912
dc.relationNakajima I, N. R. (2021). Staphylococcus bacteremia without evidence of cardiac implantable electronic device infection. Heart Rhythm , 18:752
dc.relationOlsen T, J. O. (2019). Incidence of device-related infection in 97 750 patients: clinical data from the complete Danish device-cohort (1982-2018). Eur Heart J, 40:1862
dc.relationOrtega Calvo Manuel, C. D. (2002). Regresión logística no condicionada y tamaño de muestra: una revisión bibliográfica. Rev. Esp. Salud Pública, 85-93
dc.relationPatel D, K. F. (2015). Cardiac implantable electronic device lead extraction in patients with underlying infection using open thoracotomy or percutaneous techniques. Cardiol J , 22:68–74
dc.relationPeacock JE, S. J. (2018). Attempted salvage of infected cardiovascular implantable electronic devices: are there clinical factors that predict success? Pacing. Clin Electrophysiol , 41:524–531
dc.relationPolyzos KA, K. A. (2015). Risk factors for cardiac implantable electronic device infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Europace, 17:767
dc.relationPrutkin JM, R. M. (2014). Rates of and factors associated with infection in 200 909 Medicare implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implants: results from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry. Circulation , 130:1037
dc.relationRO, D. (2001). Device-associated infections: a macroproblem that starts with microadherence. Clin Infect Dis , 33:1567–1572
dc.relationRosso, F. (2016). Infección relacionada con los dispositivos cardiovasculares. Rev. Colomb. Cardiol, vol.23 no.6
dc.relationRusanov A, S. H. (2010). A 15-year experience with permanent pacemaker and defibrillator lead and patch extractions. Ann Thorac Surg , 89:44–50
dc.relationSandoe JA, B. G. (2015). Guidelines for the diagnosis, prevention and management of implantable cardiac electronic device infection. Report of a joint Working Party project on behalf of the British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy (BSAC, host organization), British Heart Rh. J Antimicrob Chemother , 70:325–359
dc.relationSchaerf RHM, N. S. (2016). Percutaneous vacuum-assisted thrombectomy device used for removal of large vegetations on infected pacemaker and defibrillator leads as an adjunct to lead extraction. J Atr Fibrillation , 9:1455
dc.relationSohail MR, H. C.-F. (2011). Mortality and cost associated with cardiovascular implantable electronic device infections. Arch Intern Med , 171:1821
dc.relationSohail MR, U. D. (2007). Risk factor analysis of permanent pacemaker infection. Clin Infect Dis, 45:166
dc.relationSpittell PC, H. D. (1992). Venous complications after insertion of a transvenous pacemaker. . Mayo Clin Proc , 67:258
dc.relationStarck CT, E.-G. J.-D. (2018). Managing large lead vegetations in transvenous lead extractions using a percutaneous aspiration technique. Expert Rev Med Devices, 15:757–761
dc.relationSuarez, K. (2019). A Review of Temporary Permanent Pacemakers and a Comparison with Conventional Temporary Pacemakers. J Innov Card Rhythm Manag, 10(5): 3652–3661
dc.relationTan EM, D. D. (2017). Outcomes in patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic device infection managed with chronic antibiotic suppression. Clin Infect Dis , 64: 1516–1521
dc.relationTarakji KG, C. E. (2010). Cardiac implantable electronic device infections: presentation, management, and patient outcomes. Heart Rhythm , 7:1043
dc.relationUslan DZ, S. M. (2007). Permanent pacemaker and implantable cardioverter defibrillator infection: a population-based study. . Arch Intern Med, 67:669–675
dc.rightsAtribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 4.0 Internacional
dc.rightshttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.titleEvaluación pronóstica del score PADIT para la predicción de infección asociada a dispositivos cardíacos implantables en población colombiana
dc.typeTrabajo de grado - Especialidad Médica


Este ítem pertenece a la siguiente institución