Prosthetic vascular infection complicated or not by aortoenteric fistula: Comparison of treatment with and without cryopreserved allograft (homograft)

Lavigne, Jean-Paul; Postal, Alain; Kolh, Philippe; Limet, R

doi:10.1053/ejvs.2002.1865

Cited by 42 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These patients had serious septic general condition, too (Table 2), and this fact explains the high postoperative complication and mortality rate. Lavigne [7] reported similar experience with allograft use.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 89%

“…SAEF represents an even more serious condition than an infected aortoiliac prosthetic implant [7]. SAEFs are a rare complication of open aortic surgery with rates that vary between 0.5% and 1.5% of cases [8][9][10].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The primary mortality rate is reported between 35% and 50% [7] in case of SAEF, if allograft was used. We applied allograft as an alternative of Dacron graft for patients who had multiple bacterial infections, and dominantly, Gram-negative bacteria were involved.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Late outcome following open surgical management of secondary aortoenteric fistula

Bíró

Szabó

Fehérvári

et al. 2011

Langenbecks Arch Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 89%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Late outcome following open surgical management of secondary aortoenteric fistula

Bíró

Szabó

Fehérvári

et al. 2011

Langenbecks Arch Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, one can argue whether it is not needed because a higher graft insufficiency rate was reported. Thus the extra-anatomical axillofemoral bypass has been reported to have better long time results [12]. It can be related to cryopreservation damage and lack of immunosuppression either.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Vascular Graft Infection: A Single Centre Analysis

Kysela¹,

Šilhart²

2015

J Vasc Med Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Though the frequency of vascular graft infections is very low, its consequences are too serious. The paper aims at the vascular graft infection causes analysis in a single centre. Results achievable by means of several approaches have been discussed and a possible way of lowering the vascular graft infection rate has been tested. Material and methods:A population of 2812 patients having implanted an artificial vascular graft in 2000-2010 were prospectively followed up. Upon the analysis of risk factors, the control group of 653 patients operated on during 2011-2013 were followed up.Results: Number of vascular graft infections was 28 (1,0%). Amputation rate was 19% (5 patients) and the overall mortality 14% (4 patients). Leading signs of the infection were local findings in 88%. All patients with the infection had two or more co-existing independent risk factors picked out by chi-square statistics. It was obesity, repeated interventions and emergency surgery (p<0,001). Gender (men), co-existing infection, diabetes and too long bypass were also significant (p<0,01). There was not MRSA infection at all. After adoption of risk factors reducing approach, there was not proven decreased infection occurrence in patients with implanted artificial grafts. However, during the control period, a higher share of autologous grafts and endovascular methods were used. Thus the overall infection rate was reduced from 0,43 to 0,31%. Conclusion:The graft infection is not a matter of resistant bacteria, but the infection in general. An accumulation of more than two independent risk factors according to local situation should be avoided. As the infection treatment is very demanding with uncertain results, patient's wish should be taken into account as well. In all primaries, the use of the artificials ought to be minimized and endovascular procedures should be preferred, where appropriate. Emergency surgery should be avoided by in time indication to revascularization.

show abstract

“…We found no significant difference in the incidence of infection among AAA or AIOD patients, although there were more inguinal infections in the AIOD group. Specific aspects of graft infection have been widely analysed (7)(8)(9)(10)(11)(12)(13). Despite precise prophylactic rules, prosthesis infection still occurs with an on-going debate about the optimal treatment.…”

Section: Systematic Late Us Examinationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Open Surgery for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm or Aorto-Iliac Occlusive Disease — Clinical and Ultrasonographic Long-Term Results

Fontaine¹,

Kolh²,

Creemers³

et al. 2008

Acta Chirurgica Belgica

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prosthetic vascular infection complicated or not by aortoenteric fistula: Comparison of treatment with and without cryopreserved allograft (homograft)

Abstract: compared to conventional treatment, incidence of reoperations and length of hospital stay are significantly decreased after cryopreserved allograft implantation. However, closure of aortic stump and extra-anatomic bypass gives better results for patients with AEF.

Cited by 42 publications

References 19 publications

Late outcome following open surgical management of secondary aortoenteric fistula

Late outcome following open surgical management of secondary aortoenteric fistula

Vascular Graft Infection: A Single Centre Analysis

Open Surgery for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm or Aorto-Iliac Occlusive Disease — Clinical and Ultrasonographic Long-Term Results

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About