Publication: Postimplantation pocket hematoma increases risk of cardiac implantable electronic device infection: A meta-analysis
Issued Date
2021-06-01
Resource Type
ISSN
18832148
18804276
18804276
Other identifier(s)
2-s2.0-85102433281
Rights
Mahidol University
Rights Holder(s)
SCOPUS
Bibliographic Citation
Journal of Arrhythmia. Vol.37, No.3 (2021), 635-644
Suggested Citation
Jakrin Kewcharoen, Chanavuth Kanitsoraphan, Sittinun Thangjui, Thiratest Leesutipornchai, Sakditad Saowapa, Apichai Pokawattana, Leenhapong Navaravong Postimplantation pocket hematoma increases risk of cardiac implantable electronic device infection: A meta-analysis. Journal of Arrhythmia. Vol.37, No.3 (2021), 635-644. doi:10.1002/joa3.12516 Retrieved from: https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/78179
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Authors
Journal Issue
Thesis
Title
Postimplantation pocket hematoma increases risk of cardiac implantable electronic device infection: A meta-analysis
Abstract
Introduction: Several studies have shown an inconsistent relationship between postimplantation pocket hematoma and cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infection. In this study, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the effect of postimplantation hematoma and the risk of CIED infection. Methods: We searched the databases of MEDLINE and EMBASE from inception to March 2020. Included studies were cohort studies, case-control studies, cross-sectional studies, and randomized controlled trials that reported incidence of postimplantation pocket hematoma and CIED infection during the follow-up period. CIED infection was defined as either a device-related local or systemic infection. Data from each study were combined using the random effects, generic inverse variance method of Der Simonian and Laird to calculate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: Fourteen studies were included in final analysis, involving a total of 28 319 participants. In random-effect model, we found that postimplantation pocket hematoma significantly increases the risk of overall CIED infection (OR = 6.30, 95% CI: 3.87-10.24, I2 = 49.3%). There was no publication bias observed in the funnel plot as well as no small-study effect observed in Egger’s test. Conclusions: Our meta-analysis demonstrated that postimplantation pocket hematoma significantly increases the risk of CIED infection. Precaution should be taken during device implantation to reduce postimplantation hematoma and subsequent CIED infection.