Preoperative antibiotics and cardiovascular implantable electronic device infection: A cohort study in veterans. Issue 11 (26th September 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Alzahrani, Talal; Liappis, Angelike P.; Baddour, Larry M.; Karasik, Pamela E.
• Is Part Of: Pacing and clinical electrophysiology. Volume 41:Issue 11(2018)
• Page Start: 1513
• Page End: 1518
• Publication Date: 2018-09-26
• Subjects: cardiac device -- infection -- preoperative -- prophylaxis -- surgical site -- vancomycin; Cardiac pacing -- Periodicals; Electrophysiology -- Periodicals; 617.4120645
• DOI: 10.1111/pace.13499
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0147-8389

Abstract

Abstract: Background: Cefazolin is used as standard preoperative prophylaxis for a variety of surgical procedures that involve the skin. In contrast, vancomycin is recommended for a minority of patients, specifically those with an IgE‐mediated allergy to beta‐lactams and considered in patients with known colonization with methicillin‐resistant Staphylococcus aureus or at high risk for such. Vancomycin, however, has been overprescribed, has nephrotoxicity risk, and may be less effective due to its inferior coverage of methicillin‐susceptible S. aureus and lack of Gram‐negative coverage. This study was performed to assess whether vancomycin use was associated with an increased incidence of cardiovascular implantable electronic device infection (CIEDI) as compared to that of cefazolin or other antistaphylococcal beta‐lactam antibiotics. Methods: The VA Informatics and Computing Infrastructure database, which included all veterans who underwent CIED placement or revision between 2008 and 2015, was used. A logistic regression model was constructed to estimate the adjusted odds of CIEDI. Results: Overall, 10, 454 CIED procedures were included, and 98% of them were performed in men with a mean age of 71 ± 12 years. The logistic regression analysis showed that vancomycin use alone or in combination with other antibiotics was associated with an increased risk of CIEDI (odds ratio 2.99 [1.76–5.06], P‐value < 0.001), after controlling for other effects. Conclusions: Our study revealed that among patients who received surgical site infection prophylaxis for CIED placement or revision, there was: (1) an unanticipated high rate of vancomycin use, and (2) a threefold increase in the incidence of subsequent CIEDI among vancomycin recipient