Vol 74, No 1 (2016)
Original articles
Published online: 2015-06-18

open access

Page views 1085
Article views/downloads 1224
Get Citation

Connect on Social Media

Connect on Social Media

New diagnostic pathways urgently needed. Protocol of PET Guidance I pilot study: positron emission tomography in suspected cardiac implantable electronic device-related infection

Marta Barbara Marciniak-Emmons, Maciej Sterliński, Paweł Syska, Aleksander Maciąg, Michał Mirosław Farkowski, Bohdan Firek, Mirosław Dziuk, Dariusz Zając, Mariusz Pytkowski, Hanna Szwed
Kardiol Pol 2016;74(1):47-52.

Abstract

Background: Cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) infection is a complication of increasing incidence. We present a protocol of an observational case control clinical trial “Positron Emission Tomography Combined With Computed Tomography (PET CT) in Suspected Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Infection, a Pilot Study — PET Guidance I” (NCT02196753).

Aim: The aim of this observational clinical trial is to assess and standardise diagnostic algorithms for CIED infections (lead-dependent infective endocarditis, generator pocket infection, fever of unknown origin) with PET CT in Poland.

Methods and results: Study group will consist of 20 patients with initial diagnosis of CIED-related infection paired with a control group of 20 patients with implanted CIEDs, who underwent PET CT due to other non-infectious indications and have no data for infectious process in follow-up. All patients included in the study will undergo standard diagnostic pro­cess. Conventional/standard diagnostic and therapeutic process will consist of: medical interview, physical examination, laboratory tests, blood cultures; imaging studies: echocardiography: transthoracic (TTE), and, if there are no contraindications transoesophageal, computed tomography scan for pulmonary embolism if indicated; if there are abnormalities in other systems, decisions concerning further diagnostics will be made at the physician’s discretion. As well as standard diagnostic procedures, patients will undergo whole body PET CT scan to localise infection or inflammation. Diagnosis and therapeutic decision will be obtained from the Study Committee. Follow-up will be held within six months with control visits at three and six months. During each follow-up visit, all patients will undergo laboratory tests, two blood cultures collected 1 h apart, and TTE. In case of actual clinical suspicion of infective endocarditis or local generator pocket infection, patients will be referred for further diagnostics. Endpoints for the results assessment — primary endpoints are to standardise PET CT in the diagnostic process: sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of the diagnosis made by PET CT; secondary endpoints are: assessment of usefulness of PET CT for detection of remote infective complications (metastatic abscesses, infected pulmonary emboli), incidence of particular localisations of infection, influence of PET CT on therapeutic decision: confirmation or change of decision based on PET CT, safety and complications of diagnostic process of CIED-related infections with PET CT.

Conclusions: Evaluation of PET CT use for device-related infections in a case control study may be conclusive and improve diagnostic pathway.




Polish Heart Journal (Kardiologia Polska)