Klinische Auswirkungen & Kosten von Schrittmacherinfektionen
TauroPace™ als effektive Prävention
Präoperativ [4]
Präoperative Verabreichung von Antibiotika bei 90 % aller Schrittmacheroperationen mit Cephalosporinen oder Vancomycin
Regelmäßig
Perioperativ [4,5]
Perioperatives Spülen der Schrittmachertasche mit antimikrobiellen Lösungen (während des Eingriffs) bei ca. 75–90 %
Normalerweise
Postoperativ [4]
Postoperative Verabreichung von IV-Antibiotika
Gelegentlich
- 36.722 € Kosten pro Infektion (aus Sicht des Leistungsträgers) [13]
- 26–29 Tage Krankenhausaufenthalt (durchschnittlich)
- 59.419 € Mehrkosten für jede sondenassoziierte Endokarditis (aus Sicht der Kostentragenden) [3]
- 31.493–33.777 € Kosten für jede lokale Infektion (erstmalige Implantate / Revisionen)
Rehospitalisierungen machen ~ 50 % der durch schwerwiegende Schrittmacherinfektionen bedingten Kosten aus. Die Behandlung von schwerwiegenden Infektionen ist im Vergleich zu Tascheninfektionen mit höheren Kosten verbunden, da die Behandlung von infektiöser Endokarditis deutlich komplexer ist.
- Lokal angewandter antimikrobieller Schutz verhindert Schrittmacherinfektionen. [10]
- Polyvinylpyrrolidon verlängert die Wirkung von Taurolidin.
- Enthält keine Antibiotika – keine Entwicklung von Resistenzen bekannt.
- Flüssige Lösung – kein Fremdkörper-Nidus für potenzielle Infektionen.
- Nach antimikrobieller Wirkungsentfaltung verbleibt nur Taurin im Körper.
- Rennert-May et al. Epidemiology of cardiac implantable electronic device infections in the United States: A population-based cohort study. Heart Rhythm 2020. DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2020.02.012
- Sohail et al. Increased long-term mortality in patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic device infections. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2015. DOI: 10.1111/pace.12518
- Ludwig et al. Incidence and costs of cardiac device infections: retrospective analysis using German health claims data. J Comp Eff Res 2018. DOI: 10.2217/cer-2017-0080
- Blomström-Lundqvist et al. European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) international consensus document on how to prevent, diagnose, and treat cardiac implantable electronic device infections […]. EP Europace 2020. DOI: 10.1093/europace/euz246
- Tarakji et al. Antibacterial Envelope to Prevent Cardiac Implantable Device Infection. N Engl J Med 2019. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1901111
- Mittal et al. Cardiac implantable electronic device infections: incidence, risk factors, and the effect of the AigisRx antibacterial envelope. Heart Rhythm 2014. DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2013.12.013
- Eby et al. Predictors of cardiac implantable electronic device infection from a large United States healthcare organisation. EP Europace 2018. DOI: 10.1093/europace/euy015.306
- Unpublished WIDO data on file at CAU Medical Faculty (Kiel, Germany).
- Henke et al. Taurolidine containing antimicrobial wash to prevent cardiac implantable electronic device infection. Abstract presented at Heart Rhythm Congress 2022. Eur J Arrhythm Electrophysiol 2022. (Abstract 129)
- Borov et al. Use of a taurolidine containing antimicrobial wash to reduce cardiac implantable electronic device infection. EP Europace 2023. DOI: 10.1093/europace/euad306
- Wu et al. Collagen sponge prolongs taurine release for improved wound healing through inflammation inhibition and proliferation stimulation. Ann Transl Med 2019. DOI: 10.21037/atm-21-2739
- Radakovic et al. Taurolidine Acts on Bacterial Virulence Factors and Does Not Induce Resistance in Periodontitis-Associated Bacteria – An In-Vitro Study. Antibiotics (Basel) 2020. DOI: 10.3390/antibiotics9040166
- Ahsan et al. A simple infection-control protocol to reduce serious cardiac device infections. EP Europace 2014. DOI: 10.1093/europace/euu126
- Polyzos et al. Risk factors for cardiac implantable electronic device infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. EP Europace 2015. DOI: 10.1093/europace/euv053
- Ahmed et al. Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infections are expensive and associated with prolonged hospitalisation: UK Retrospective Observational Study. PLoS One 2019. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0206611
- Redmond et al. RandomiSed clinical trial assessing Use of an anti-inflammatoRy aGent in attenUating peri-operatiVe inflAmmatioN in non-meTastatic colon cancer - the S.U.R.G.U.V.A.N.T. trial. BMC Cancer 2018. DOI: 10.1186/s12885-018-4641-x
- Borov et al. Salvage of infected cardiac implantable electronic device with taurolidine—a case report. Cardiothorac Surg 2022. DOI: 10.1186/s43057-022-00068-5
- Browne et al. Taurolin, a new chemotherapeutic agent. J Appl Bacteriol 1976. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2672.1976.tb00647.x
- Pfirrmann et al. The anti-endotoxin activity of Taurolin in experimental animals. J Appl Bacteriol 1979. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2672.1979.tb02586.x
- Gidley et al. The mode of antibacterial action of some ‘masked’ formaldehyde compounds. FEBS Letters 1981. DOI: 10.1016/0014-5793(81)80211-6
- Gorman et al. Electron and light microscopic observations of bacterial cell surface effects due to taurolidine treatment. Lett Appl Microbiol 1987. DOI: 10.1111/j.1472-765X.1987.tb01593.x
- Blenkharn et al. Sustained anti-adherence activity of taurolidine (Taurolin) and noxythiolin (Noxyflex S) solutions. J Pharm Pharmacol 1988. DOI: 10.1111/j.2042-7158.1988.tb05288.x
- Jacobi et al. Taurolidine—a new drug with anti-tumor and anti-angiogenic effects. Anticancer Drugs 2005. DOI: 10.1097/01.cad.0000176502.40810.b0
- Caruso et al. Taurolidine antiadhesive properties on interaction with E. coli; its transformation in biological environment and interaction with bacteria cell wall. PLoS One 2010. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0008927
- Dinçer et al. Effect of taurine on wound healing. Amino Acids 1996. DOI: 10.1007/BF00806093