作者
Charles J. Love,Ibrahim R. Hanna,George Thomas,Arnold J. Greenspon,Melissa Christie,Jonathan M. Goodman,Matthew J. Christopherson,Vasanthi Balaji,Shira Skulsky,Matthew R. Sanders,Carrie Bauer,William Schindeldecker,Nicole Kirchhof,M. Rizwan Sohail
摘要
Background The TYRX (Medtronic) absorbable antibacterial envelope has been shown to stabilize implantable cardiac devices and reduce infection. A third-generation envelope was developed to reduce surface roughness with a redesigned multifilament mesh and enhanced form factor but identical polymer coating and antibiotic concentrations as the currently available second-generation envelope. Objective The purpose of this study was to compare drug elution, bacterial challenge efficacy, stabilization, and absorption of second- vs third-generation envelopes. Methods Antibiotic elution was assessed in vitro and in vivo. For efficacy against gram-positive/gram-negative bacteria, 40 rabbits underwent device insertions with or without third-generation envelopes. For stabilization (migration, rotation), 5 sheep were implanted with 6 devices each in second- or third-generation envelopes. Prespecified acceptance criteria were <83-mm migration and <90° rotation. Absorption was assessed via gross pathology. Results Elution curves were equivalent (similarity factors ≥50 per Food and Drug Administration guidance). Third-generation envelopes eluted antibiotics above minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) in vivo at 2 hours postimplant through 7 days, consistent with second-generation envelopes. Bacterial challenge showed reductions (P <.05) in infection with second- and third-generation envelopes. Device migration was 5.5 ± 3.5 mm (third-generation) vs 9. 9 ±7.9 mm (second-generation) (P <.05). Device rotation was 18.9° ± 11.4° (third-generation) vs 17.6° ± 15.1° (second-generation) and did not differ (P = .79). Gross pathology confirmed the absence of luminal mesh remainders and no differences in peridevice fibrosis at 9 or 12 weeks. Conclusion The third-generation TYRX absorbable antibacterial envelope demonstrated equivalent preclinical performance to the second-generation envelope. Antibiotic elution curves were similar, elution was above MIC for 7 days, infections were reduced compared to no envelope, and acceptance criteria for migration, rotation, and absorption were met. The TYRX (Medtronic) absorbable antibacterial envelope has been shown to stabilize implantable cardiac devices and reduce infection. A third-generation envelope was developed to reduce surface roughness with a redesigned multifilament mesh and enhanced form factor but identical polymer coating and antibiotic concentrations as the currently available second-generation envelope. The purpose of this study was to compare drug elution, bacterial challenge efficacy, stabilization, and absorption of second- vs third-generation envelopes. Antibiotic elution was assessed in vitro and in vivo. For efficacy against gram-positive/gram-negative bacteria, 40 rabbits underwent device insertions with or without third-generation envelopes. For stabilization (migration, rotation), 5 sheep were implanted with 6 devices each in second- or third-generation envelopes. Prespecified acceptance criteria were <83-mm migration and <90° rotation. Absorption was assessed via gross pathology. Elution curves were equivalent (similarity factors ≥50 per Food and Drug Administration guidance). Third-generation envelopes eluted antibiotics above minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) in vivo at 2 hours postimplant through 7 days, consistent with second-generation envelopes. Bacterial challenge showed reductions (P <.05) in infection with second- and third-generation envelopes. Device migration was 5.5 ± 3.5 mm (third-generation) vs 9. 9 ±7.9 mm (second-generation) (P <.05). Device rotation was 18.9° ± 11.4° (third-generation) vs 17.6° ± 15.1° (second-generation) and did not differ (P = .79). Gross pathology confirmed the absence of luminal mesh remainders and no differences in peridevice fibrosis at 9 or 12 weeks. The third-generation TYRX absorbable antibacterial envelope demonstrated equivalent preclinical performance to the second-generation envelope. Antibiotic elution curves were similar, elution was above MIC for 7 days, infections were reduced compared to no envelope, and acceptance criteria for migration, rotation, and absorption were met.