Chlorhexidine gluconate pocket lavage to prevent cardiac implantable electronic device infection in high-risk procedures.

BACKGROUND: Infection is the most dreaded complication of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs), particularly in patients undergoing high-risk procedures (eg, generator change, device upgrade, lead/pocket revision). OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to describe the impact of chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) pocket lavage in high-risk procedures. METHODS: Patients from a prospective multicenter registry undergoing high-risk procedures were included. CHG lavage was performed by irrigating the generator pocket with 20 cc of 2% CHG without alcohol followed by and normal saline (NS) irrigation. Only NS irrigation was performed in the comparison group. The primary efficacy outcome was CIED-related infection at 12 months. The primary safety outcome was any CHG-associated adverse event. The secondary outcome was CIED infection during long-term follow-up. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed for the primary efficacy outcome. RESULTS: A total of 1504 patients were included. At 12-month follow-up, the primary efficacy outcome occurred in 4 of 904 CHG (0.4%) and 14 of 600 NS (2.3%) subjects (log-rank P = .005). On multivariate analysis, the use of CHG irrigation was associated with a lower risk of infection at 1-year follow-up (Cox proportional hazard ratio [HR] 0.138; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.04-0.45; P = .001). This effect persisted during long-term follow-up. PSM demonstrated a significant reduction in CIED-related infection for the CHG group (0.2% vs 2.5%; Cox proportional HR 0.08; 95% CI 0.01-0.59; P = .014). No adverse events were associated with the use of CHG. CONCLUSION: CHG lavage during high-risk procedures was associated with a reduction in CIED-related infections without any adverse events reported. The benefits of CHG lavage were observed even during long-term follow up and in PSM analysis.

Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing Versus Biventricular Pacing as Initial Strategy for Cardiac Resynchronization.

BACKGROUND: Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is an alternative to biventricular pacing (BiVp). OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes between LBBAP and BiVp as an initial implant strategy for CRT. METHODS: In this prospective multicenter, observational, nonrandomized study, first-time CRT implant recipients with LBBAP or BiVp were included. The primary efficacy outcome was a composite of heart failure (HF)-related hospitalization and all-cause mortality. The primary safety outcomes were acute and long-term complications. Secondary outcomes included postprocedural New York Heart Association functional class and electrocardiographic and echocardiographic parameters. RESULTS: A total of 371 patients (median follow-up of 340 days [IQR: 206-477 days]) were included. The primary efficacy outcome occurred in 24.2% in the LBBAP vs 42.4% in the BiVp (HR: 0.621 [95% CI: 0.415-0.93]; P = 0.021) group, driven by a reduction in HF-related hospitalizations (22.6% vs 39.5%; HR: 0.607 [95% CI: 0.397-0.927]; P = 0.021) without significant difference in all-cause mortality (5.5% vs 11.9%; P = 0.19) or differences in long-term complications (LBBAP: 9.4% vs BiVp: 15.2%; P = 0.146). LBBAP resulted in shorter procedural (95 minutes [IQR: 65-120 minutes] vs 129 minutes [IQR: 103-162 minutes]; P < 0.001) and fluoroscopy times (12 minutes [IQR: 7.4-21.1 minutes] vs 21.7 minutes [IQR: 14.3-30 minutes]; P < 0.001), shorter QRS duration (123.7 ± 18 milliseconds vs 149.3 ± 29.1 milliseconds; P < 0.001), and higher postprocedural left ventricular ejection fraction (34.1% ± 12.5% vs 31.4% ± 10.8%; P = 0.041). CONCLUSIONS: LBBAP as an initial CRT strategy resulted in a lower risk of HF-related hospitalizations compared to BiVp. A reduction in procedural and fluoroscopy times, shorter paced QRS duration, and improvements in left ventricular ejection fraction compared with BiVp were observed.

A lost cable: «reel¼ syndrome / Un cable suelto: síndrome del «carrete¼

Abstract: Lead dislodgement syndromes (twiddler, ratchet or reel syndromes) are rare causes of cardiac stimulation device malfunction that can occur most commonly early after device implantation. In most cases, lead replacement (due to extensive damage) or reposition (due to displacement) is needed. We present a case of reel syndrome involving the left ventricular lead of a (AU)

Resumen: Los síndromes de desprendimiento de los cables (síndrome de "tweedler", trinquete o carrete) son causas raras de disfunción del dispositivo de estimulación cardiaca, que generalmente ocurren en el periodo temprano después del implante. En la mayoría de los casos, se requiere el reemplazo del cable (debido a daños extensos) o el reposicionamiento (debido al desplazamiento). Presentamos un caso de síndrome del carrete que involucra de manera exclusiva el cable ventricular izquierdo de un dispositivo de resincronización-desfibrilador cardiaco.(AU)

Plan estratégico de desarrollo con enfoque por procesos en una empresa social del estado: guía para su elaboración / Strategic plan of development with focus for processes in a state social company: guide for its elaboration

Se presenta un instrumento que pretende servir de guía para la elaboración de un plan de desarrollo institucional de tipo estratégico con enfoque por procesos y basado en los conceptos y teorías de la gerencia social para una institución prestadora de servicios de salud y específicamente para una Empresa Social del Estado. En él se utilizan el análisis sistémico, la gestión por procesos y la gerencia estratégica como componentes metodológicos a desarrollar...