Risk factors for cardiac implantable electronic device infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Infectious complications after cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation are increasing over time and are associated with substantial mortality and healthcare costs. The aim of this study was to systematically summarize the literature on risk factors for infection after pacemaker, implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, and cardiac resynchronization therapy device implantation. Electronic searches (up to January 2014) were performed in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. Sixty studies (21 prospective, 9 case-control, and 30 retrospective cohort studies) met the inclusion criteria. The average device infection rate was 1-1.3%. In the meta-analysis, significant host-related risk factors for infection included diabetes mellitus (odds ratio (OR) [95% confidence interval] = 2.08 [1.62-2.67]), end-stage renal disease (OR = 8.73 [3.42-22.31]), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR = 2.95 [1.78-4.90]), corticosteroid use (OR = 3.44 [1.62-7.32]), history of the previous device infection (OR = 7.84 [1.94-31.60]), renal insufficiency (OR = 3.02 [1.38-6.64]), malignancy (OR = 2.23 [1.26-3.95]), heart failure (OR = 1.65 [1.14-2.39]), pre-procedural fever (OR = 4.27 [1.13-16.12]), anticoagulant drug use (OR = 1.59 [1.01-2.48]), and skin disorders (OR = 2.46 [1.04-5.80]). Regarding procedure-related factors, post-operative haematoma(OR = 8.46 [4.01-17.86]), reintervention for lead dislodgement (OR = 6.37 [2.93-13.82]), device replacement/revision (OR = 1.98 [1.46-2.70]), lack of antibiotic prophylaxis (OR = 0.32 [0.18-0.55]), temporary pacing (OR = 2.31 [1.36-3.92]), inexperienced operator (OR = 2.85 [1.23-6.58]), and procedure duration (weighted mean difference = 9.89 [0.52-19.25]) were all predictors of CIED infection. Among device-related characteristics, abdominal pocket (OR = 4.01 [2.48-6.49]), epicardial leads (OR = 8.09 [3.46-18.92]), positioning of two or more leads (OR = 2.02 [1.11-3.69]), and dual-chamber systems (OR = 1.45 [1.02-2.05]) predisposed to device infection. This systematic review on risk factors for CIED infection may contribute to developing better infection control strategies for high-risk patients and can also help risk assessment in the management of device revisions.