FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W4367846261> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W4367846261 abstract "Introduction: Treating patients with CIED infections is often challenging. In general, the infected device, including all leads, needs to be completely removed before a new CIED can be implanted. Especially in pacemaker-dependent patients, it is often impossible to have a device-free interval to treat the infection. In those cases, the question remains when to implant a new CIED and which bridging strategy to use. Methods: In this single-center retrospective analysis, we included 190 patients who received a complete CIED system extraction between 2013 and 2019 due to device-related infection. We compared three different treatment algorithms. Group 1 (SR) included 89 patients who received system removal only (and delayed re-implantation). Group 2 (EL) consisted of 28 patients who were treated with lead extraction and simultaneous epicardial lead implantation, while the 78 patients in Group 3 (SI) received lead removal with simultaneous contralateral implantation of a new device. We retrospectively analyzed the peri- and postoperative course and one-year follow-up. Results: Patients in the SR and EL groups were significantly older, had more comorbidities and a higher percentage of systemic infection compared to the SI group. We found a comparable high number of successful infection treatments in all groups, with complete lead removal in 95.5%, 96.4%, and 93.2% for the SR, EL, and SI groups, respectively. Lead vegetations were removed in 97.7%, 94.1%, and 100%. Device re-implantation was 100% in the EL and SI groups, whereas in the SR group, only 49.4% of patients received a device re-implantation. At one-year follow-up, the percentage of freedom from infection and pocket irritation was comparable between groups (94.7% SR and EL, 100% SI). We observed no procedure-related mortality, while one-year mortality was 3.4% in the SR, 21.4% in the EL and 4.1% in the SI group. Conclusion: We found comparable success rates regarding device removal, successful infection treatment and perioperative course between groups. However, most likely due to the sicker patient collective with a high number of systemic infections, the one-year mortality was significantly higher in the EL group. Treatment algorithm should be selected due to type, severity, location of infection and comorbidities of the patients." @default.
• W4367846261 created "2023-05-04" @default.
• W4367846261 creator A5000972847 @default.
• W4367846261 creator A5003434925 @default.
• W4367846261 creator A5007756817 @default.
• W4367846261 creator A5013886779 @default.
• W4367846261 creator A5019964135 @default.
• W4367846261 creator A5022672783 @default.
• W4367846261 creator A5054871225 @default.
• W4367846261 creator A5070808052 @default.
• W4367846261 date "2023-05-03" @default.
• W4367846261 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W4367846261 title "Infection remediation after septic device extractions - comparison of three treatment strategies including a one-year follow-up" @default.
• W4367846261 doi "https://doi.org/10.22541/au.168309949.95912478/v1" @default.
• W4367846261 hasPublicationYear "2023" @default.
• W4367846261 type Work @default.
• W4367846261 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W4367846261 crossrefType "posted-content" @default.
• W4367846261 hasAuthorship W4367846261A5000972847 @default.
• W4367846261 hasAuthorship W4367846261A5003434925 @default.
• W4367846261 hasAuthorship W4367846261A5007756817 @default.
• W4367846261 hasAuthorship W4367846261A5013886779 @default.
• W4367846261 hasAuthorship W4367846261A5019964135 @default.
• W4367846261 hasAuthorship W4367846261A5022672783 @default.
• W4367846261 hasAuthorship W4367846261A5054871225 @default.
• W4367846261 hasAuthorship W4367846261A5070808052 @default.
• W4367846261 hasBestOaLocation W43678462611 @default.
• W4367846261 hasConcept C114793014 @default.
• W4367846261 hasConcept C127313418 @default.
• W4367846261 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W4367846261 hasConcept C167135981 @default.
• W4367846261 hasConcept C2777093003 @default.
• W4367846261 hasConcept C2780073493 @default.
• W4367846261 hasConcept C2781411149 @default.
• W4367846261 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W4367846261 hasConceptScore W4367846261C114793014 @default.
• W4367846261 hasConceptScore W4367846261C127313418 @default.
• W4367846261 hasConceptScore W4367846261C141071460 @default.
• W4367846261 hasConceptScore W4367846261C167135981 @default.
• W4367846261 hasConceptScore W4367846261C2777093003 @default.
• W4367846261 hasConceptScore W4367846261C2780073493 @default.
• W4367846261 hasConceptScore W4367846261C2781411149 @default.
• W4367846261 hasConceptScore W4367846261C71924100 @default.
• W4367846261 hasLocation W43678462611 @default.
• W4367846261 hasOpenAccess W4367846261 @default.
• W4367846261 hasPrimaryLocation W43678462611 @default.
• W4367846261 hasRelatedWork W2032388700 @default.
• W4367846261 hasRelatedWork W2119203591 @default.
• W4367846261 hasRelatedWork W2906361318 @default.
• W4367846261 hasRelatedWork W3138791732 @default.
• W4367846261 hasRelatedWork W3139267926 @default.
• W4367846261 hasRelatedWork W3204586547 @default.
• W4367846261 hasRelatedWork W4214517713 @default.
• W4367846261 hasRelatedWork W4287448225 @default.
• W4367846261 hasRelatedWork W4305082178 @default.
• W4367846261 hasRelatedWork W4319440053 @default.
• W4367846261 isParatext "false" @default.
• W4367846261 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W4367846261 workType "article" @default.