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.

Abstract licence: CC BY-NC

1. 12.

   Quantifying the risk of error when interpreting funnel plots · 2015

39 more references, whose wording the paper’s licence keeps private.

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.