RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The use of an antibacterial envelope is cost-effective for patients at high risk of developing cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infection. The identification of these high-risk patients may be facilitated using a clinical risk score. The aim of the current study is to evaluate the PADIT score for identifying high-risk patients in patients undergoing a CIED procedure in a tertiary academic center. METHODS: This was a retrospective single-center study of consecutive patients undergoing a CIED procedure between January 2016 and November 2021. Patients who received an antibacterial envelope were excluded from this study. The primary endpoint was hospitalization for a CIED infection in the first year after the procedure. RESULTS: A total of 2333 CIED procedures were performed in the study period (mean age 61.6 ± 16.3 years, male sex 64.5%, previous CIED infection 1.7%, immunocompromised 5.4%). The median PADIT score was 4 (interquartile range, 2-6). CIED infection occurred in 10 patients (0.43%). The PADIT score had good discrimination in predicting major CIED infection (C-statistic 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.54 to 0.86, P = 0.03). Using an optimal PADIT score cut-off value of 7, the risk of CIED infection was higher in the patients with a PADIT score of ≥ 7 in comparison to those with a lower PADIT score (1.23% vs. 0.26%, P = 0.02; odds ratio 4.8, 95% CI 1.4 to 16.6, P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The PADIT score is a clinically useful score for identifying patients at high risk of developing CIED infection. The use of an antibacterial envelope in these high-risk patients may be cost-effective.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The effect of administering a crushed prasugrel loading dose is uncertain in patients presenting with a large myocardial infarction and ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). AIMS: The aim of this study was to investigate if patients with a large myocardial infarction may benefit from prehospital administration of a crushed prasugrel loading dose. METHODS: Patients from the CompareCrush trial with an available ambulance electrocardiography (ECG) were included in the study. An independent core laboratory confirmed a prehospital large myocardial area. We compared pre- and postprocedural angiographic markers, including Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) 3 flow in the infarct-related artery, high thrombus burden, and myocardial blush grade 3, in STEMI patients with and without a prehospital large myocardial area. RESULTS: Ambulance ECG was available for 532 patients, of whom 331 patients were identified with a prehospital large myocardial area at risk. Crushed prasugrel significantly improved postprocedural TIMI 3 flow rates in STEMI patients with a prehospital large myocardial area at risk (92% vs 79%, odds ratio [OR] 3.00, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.50-6.00) but not in STEMI patients without a prehospital large myocardial area at risk (91% vs 95%, OR 0.47, 95% CI: 0.14-1.57; pinteraction=0.009). CONCLUSIONS: Administration of crushed prasugrel may improve postprocedural TIMI 3 flow in STEMI patients with signs of a large myocardial area at risk on the ambulance ECG. The practice of crushing tablets of prasugrel loading dose might, therefore, represent a safe, fast and cost-effective strategy to improve myocardial reperfusion in this high-risk STEMI subgroup undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention.