Técnica de implante subpeitoral para tratamento de infecção de loja de marcapasso: estudo inicial

Abstract

Valente A S, Pochini M C, Pinto A M R, Campagnucci V P, Marinelli I, Gandra S M A, Rivetti L A -Técnica de implante subpeitoral para tratamento de infecção de loja de marcapasso: estudo inicial.

Biofilme em marca-passo artificial: ficção ou realidade?

“…The subpectoral implantation technique proved to be a feasible alternative in the treatment of pacemaker generator pocket infection, showing 100% effectiveness, a shorter hospital stay and a lower cost. However, further studies and follow-up are necessary for a definitive conclusion [3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12] .…”

“…All areas with cracks accumulated biofilm, which may justify the difficulty of action of therapy with antibiotics 22 . Therefore, in most cases, the removal of endocardial systems is indicated [2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10]12,22 .…”

“…• A new technique for the management of pacemaker pocket infection without the removal of endocardial systems proved, in principle, a feasible low-cost alternative, however, we still need follow-up studies for a definitive conclusion 3 . This was the only study that proposed an alternative for the treatment of infection related to the pacemaker and has had good results.…”

“…Although pacemaker implantation surgery is considered less complex, it is important to observe that, for being an invasive procedure and representing a foreign body, it puts the patient at risk for various complications, sometimes due to failures of generators, tissue damage or due to the implantation technique 2,3 . The diversity of techniques and conducts has provided improvement in surgical technique, however, there is limited information on the implications and effects of these improvements 4 .…”

“…Several conducts have been described for the treatment of infection of pacemaker pocket. More conservative therapeutic approaches seem to produce higher rates of relapse or failure of treatment [2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18] , and the best results relate to more aggressive approaches, with complete removal and implantation of new endocardial systems [3][4][5][6][7][8] , which is usually associated with high hospitalization rates and high costs 3 .…”