Skip Navigation



Europace Advance Access published online on June 12, 2007
Europace, doi:10.1093/europace/eum112
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
9/10/890    most recent
eum112v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gallagher, M. M.
Right arrow Articles by Romeo, F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Gallagher, M. M.
Right arrow Articles by Romeo, F.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The European Society of Cardiology 2007. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Feasibility and safety of a simplified draping method for pacing procedures

Mark M. Gallagher*, Luca Santini, Giulia Magliano, Marianna Sgueglia, Franco Venditti, Mina Padula and Francesco Romeo

Dipartimento di Cardiologia, Policlinico Universitario Tor Vergata, Viale Oxford 81, Roma 00133, Italy

Aims Traditional draping for pacing procedures is time-consuming. We evaluated prospectively the safety of a simplified method using a single adhesive drape intended for use in cardiac catheterization.

Methods and results A single disposable adhesive drape was used in each of 250 consecutive pacing procedures by the same operator including 200 device implants and 50 revision procedures. We compared the results with those of 114 procedures performed in the same cardiac catheterization laboratory by three other operators using traditional draping methods for most cases. In the study group, no wound or pacemaker pocket infection, device erosion, or endocarditis was observed within the first 6 months after the procedure (0%, 95% CI 0–1.2%). One suspected infection occurred at 10 months (0.4%, 95% CI 0.1–2.2%). In the control group, there were two cases of early infection or suspected infection (2 of 114 procedures, 1.8%, 95% CI 0.27–6.1%), four cases of confirmed or suspected infection more than 6 months after the procedure giving an overall infection rate (6 of 114, 5.3%, 95% CI 2.1–11.0%) significantly higher than in the study group (P = 0.014, Fisher's exact test).

Conclusion A simplified draping method involving a single adhesive fenestrated drape can be used for pacemaker or ICD implantation or revision procedures without an excessively elevated risk of infective complications.

Key Words: Draping, Surgical technique, Pacemaker implantation, Pacemaker box change, Pacemaker infection, Complication

* Corresponding author. Tel: +39 (0) 3478993059; fax: +39 (0) 0620900383. E-mail address: mark_m_gallagher{at}hotmail.com

Manuscript submitted 22 January 2007. Accepted after revision 29 April 2007.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.