Aim. The elderly are the major population receiving the implantation of a permanent pacemaker (PPM). Infection is a devastating complication. The present study is to verify the relationship between age and PPM implantation infection. Methods. All patients (162 adult and 292 elder patients) received the implantation of PPM. Subcutaneous tissue samples solution was collected in three time points, the first sample was got at skin incision, and the second sample was got when the PPM had been implanted. And the third sample was got after 0.9% NaCl quick rinse. And the tissue solutions were cultured. If culture results are positive, it is considered as evidence of the presence of bacteria in pocket in operation of PPM implantation. Results. The data demonstrated that compared with that in the adult patients, subcutaneous bacterial survival rate was higher significantly in the elderly. Staphylococcus epidermidis is the major bacterial strain. The rinse decreased subcutaneous bacterial survival rates in the adult group. Conclusion. With the age increasing, PPM implantation might be easier to result in infection. Simple rinse can prevent implantation infection significantly. However, age alleviated the protective effects of rinse. Therefore, we should pay more attention to post implantation infection in the elderly. 1. Introduction Implantation of a permanent pacemaker (PPM) has been widely accepted and implemented worldwide as the treatment of choice for bradyarrhythmias [1]. Infection in a PPM is a serious complication. It may occur either as a surgical site infection (SSI), occurring within 1 year after implantation, or as late-onset lead endocarditis. Pacemaker implantation rates are on the rise worldwide, and the population of patients living with a PM is growing [2]. Infection is a devastating complication of PPM/ICD use. Rates of infection after system placement have varied considerably, from 0.13% to 19.9%, and antimicrobial therapy alone (without removal of the entire system) is complicated by mortality and frequent infection relapse. Thus, the prevailing opinion is that the optimal management of PPM/ICD infection includes complete removal of the device and leads coupled with antimicrobial therapy. However, this treatment will result in serious hurt to patients [2, 3]. Therefore, the best treatment is to prevent infection instead of surgery and antimicrobial therapy after infection. The elderly are the major population of PPM implantation [4]. The previous data demonstrated that aging exerted the vital effects on cardiovascular diseases [5, 6]. Then is
References
[1]
A. Catanchin, C. J. Murdock, and E. Athan, “Pacemaker infections: a 10-year experience,” Heart Lung and Circulation, vol. 16, no. 6, pp. 434–439, 2007.
[2]
F. Victor, C. de Place, C. Camus et al., “Pacemaker lead infection: echocardiographic features, management, and outcome,” Heart, vol. 81, no. 1, pp. 82–87, 1999.
[3]
J. G. Martinez, “Pacemaker pocket infection,” Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology, vol. 22, no. 4, part 1, pp. 691–692, 1999.
[4]
B. Schmidt, M. Brunner, M. Olschewski et al., “Pacemaker therapy in very elderly patients: long-term survival and prognostic parameters,” American Heart Journal, vol. 146, no. 5, pp. 908–913, 2003.
[5]
Q. Fan, M. Chen, X. Fang et al., “Aging might augment reactive oxygen species (ROS) formation and affect reactive nitrogen species (RNS) level after myocardial ischemia/reperfusion in both humans and rats,” Age, vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 1017–1026, 2012.
[6]
M. Liu, P. Zhang, M. Chen et al., “Aging might increase myocardial ischemia / reperfusion-induced apoptosis in humans and rats,” Age, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 621–632, 2012.
[7]
L. V. Armaganijan, W. D. Toff, J. C. Nielsen et al., “Are elderly patients at increased risk of complications following pacemaker implantation? A meta-analysis of randomized trials,” Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology, vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 131–134, 2012.
[8]
K. L. Yew, “Infective endocarditis and the pacemaker: cardiac implantable electronic device infection,” The Medical Journal of Malaysia, vol. 67, no. 6, pp. 618–619, 2012.
[9]
E. A. Idelevich, C. A. Pogoda, B. Ballhausen et al., “Pacemaker lead infection and related bacteraemia caused by normal and small colony variant phenotypes of Bacillus licheniformis,” Journal of Medical Microbiology, vol. 62, part 6, pp. 940–944, 2013.
[10]
World Medical Association, “World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects,” The Journal of American Medical Association, 2013.
[11]
Y. Hachiro, S. Kikuchi, M. Ito, K. Takahashi, and T. Abe, “Infection of a retained permanent epicardial pacemaker lead,” The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, vol. 71, no. 6, pp. 2038–2039, 2001.
[12]
M. Yamada, S. Takeuchi, Y. Shiojiri et al., “Surgical lead-preserving procedures for pacemaker pocket infection,” The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, vol. 74, no. 5, pp. 1494–1499, 2002.
[13]
A. J. Rastan, N. Doll, T. Walther, and F. W. Mohr, “Pacemaker dependent patients with device infection—a modified approach,” European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, vol. 27, no. 6, pp. 1116–1118, 2005.
[14]
E. Bertaglia, F. Zerbo, S. Zardo, D. Barzan, F. Zoppo, and P. Pascotto, “Antibiotic prophylaxis with a single dose of cefazolin during pacemaker implantation: incidence of long-term infective complications,” Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 29–33, 2006.
[15]
S. Perl, R. Maier, and N. Watzinger, “A sequel of pacemaker infection,” Clinical Research in Cardiology, vol. 96, no. 9, pp. 632–633, 2007.
[16]
M. R. Sohail, D. Z. Uslan, A. H. Khan et al., “Risk factor analysis of permanent pacemaker infection,” Clinical Infectious Diseases, vol. 45, no. 2, pp. 166–173, 2007.
