Graft excision and extra-anatomic revascularization: the treatment of choice for the septic aortic prosthesis

Graft excision and extra-anatomic revascularization is the treatment of choice for the septic aortic prosthesis. From 1979 to 1988, 20 patients underwent resection of aortic grafts and extra-anatomic bypass for the treatment of graft infections (No. 11) and aorto-enteric fistulas (No.9). The mean time interval from primary aortic surgery to the reoperative procedure was 65 months (range 1-192 months). Three patients died (one less than 30 days) after the secondary procedure for a mortality rate of 15%. One patient developed infection of the extra-anatomic bypass graft which resulted in an above-knee amputation. This was the only major limb loss in this series. A second patient developed contralateral buttock necrosis when he had unilateral axillary-femoral bypass without femoral-femoral bypass because of a previous above-knee amputation on the affected side. Major complications occurred in 7 patients (35%). Mean duration of follow-up after the reoperative aortic procedure was 44 months (range 6-120 months). One patient suffered aortic stump blowout 7 months after repair of an aortic duodenal fistula. Aortic graft excision and extra-anatomic revascularization of the lower extremities can be performed with low mortality and risk of limb loss and should remain the treatment of choice for aorto-enteric fistulas and infected aortic prostheses. Bilateral groin revascularization is important even in patients who have had a previous lower extremity amputation to provide pelvic blood flow.     

Intra-abdominal aortic graft infection: complete or partial graft preservation in patients at very high risk

BACKGROUND: Total graft excision with in situ or extra-anatomic revascularization is considered mandatory to treat infection involving the body of aortic grafts. We present a series of nine patients with this complication and such severe comorbid medical illnesses or markedly hostile abdomens that traditional treatments were precluded. In these patients selective complete or partial graft preservation was used. METHODS: Over the past 20 years we have treated nine infected infrarenal aortic prosthetic grafts with complete or partial graft preservation, because excision of the graft body was not feasible. In all nine patients infection of the main body of the aortic graft was documented at computed tomography or surgery. Essential adjuncts included percutaneous or operative drain placement into retroperitoneal abscess cavities and along the graft, with instillation of antibiotics three times daily, repeated debridement of infected groin wounds, and intravenous antibiotic therapy for at least 6 weeks. RESULTS: One patient with purulent groin drainage treated with complete graft preservation died of sepsis. One patient with groin infection treated with complete graft preservation initially did well, but ultimately required total graft excision 5 months later, after clinical improvement. In four patients complete graft preservation was successful; two patients required excision of an occluded infected limb of the graft; and one patient underwent subtotal graft excision, leaving a graft remnant on the aorta, and axillopopliteal bypass. In summary, seven of nine patients survived hospitalization after complete or partial graft preservation; amputation was avoided in all but one patient; and no recurrent infection developed over mean follow-up of 7.6 years (range, 2-15 years). CONCLUSIONS: Although contrary to conventional concepts, partial or complete graft preservation combined with aggressive drainage and groin wound debridement is an acceptable option for treatment of infection involving an entire aortic graft in selected patients with prohibitive risks for total graft excision. This treatment may be compatible with long-term survival and protracted absence of signs or symptoms of infection.     

Long-term outcome after treatment of aortic graft infection with staged extra-anatomic bypass grafting and aortic graft removal

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine long-term outcome in patients with infected prosthetic aortic grafts who were treated with extra-anatomic bypass grafting and aortic graft removal. METHODS: Between January 1989 and July 1999, 36 patients were treated for aortic graft infection with extra-anatomic bypass grafting and aortic graft removal. Extra-anatomic bypass graft types were axillofemoral femoral (5), axillofemoral (26; bilateral in 20), axillopopliteal (3; bilateral in 1) and axillofemoral/axillopopliteal (2). The mean follow-up was 32.3 +/- 4. 8 months. RESULTS: Four patients (11%) died in the postoperative period, and two patients died during follow-up as a direct consequence of extra-anatomic bypass grafting and aortic graft removal (one died 7 months after extra-anatomic bypass graft failure, one died 36 months after aortic stump disruption). One additional patient died 72 months after failure of a subsequent aortic reconstruction, so that the overall treatment-related mortality was 19%, whereas overall survival by means of life table analysis was 56% at 5 years. No amputations were required in the postoperative period, but four patients (11%) required amputation during follow-up. Twelve patients (35%) had extra-anatomic bypass graft failure during follow-up, and six patients underwent secondary aortic reconstruction (thoracobifemoral [2], iliofemoral [2], femorofemoral [2]). However, with the exclusion of patients undergoing axillopopliteal grafts (primary patency 0% at 7 months), only seven patients (25%) had extra-anatomic bypass graft failure, and only two patients required amputation (one after extra-anatomic bypass graft removal for infection, one after failure of a secondary aortic reconstruction). Furthermore, primary and secondary patency rates by means of life table analysis were 75% and 100% at 41 months for axillofemoral femoral grafts and 64% and 100% at 60 months for axillofemoral grafts. Only one patient required extra-anatomic bypass graft removal for recurrent infection, and only one late aortic stump disruption occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Staged extra-anatomic bypass grafting (with axillofemoral bypass graft) and aortic graft removal for treatment of aortic graft infection are associated with acceptable early and long-term outcomes and should remain a primary approach in selected patients with this grave problem.     

Long-term results following surgical management of aortic graft infection

Between January 1970 and June 1988, a total of 45 patients with aortic prosthetic graft infection underwent removal of the infected aortic prosthesis. In addition, 36 of these patients also underwent revascularization via an extra-anatomic bypass. We analyzed the early and long-term results with respect to survival, limb salvage, freedom from infection, and extra-anatomic graft patency. The 30-day mortality was 24% (11/45), and the amputation rate was 11% (8/73). During a mean follow-up of 36 months (range, 2 to 144 months), 80% (24/30) of the patients remained free of infection and are considered cured. Infection in the extra-anatomic bypass graft was the most common cause of recurrent sepsis and the leading cause of late amputations (four of seven). By life-table methods, 1-year survival was 63% and 5-year survival was 49%. Limb salvage rates at 1 and 5 years were 79% and 66%, respectively. The primary patency rate of extra-anatomic bypass was 43% at 3 years, with the secondary patency rate improved to 65%. These early and late results are in marked contrast to the natural history of untreated aortic graft infection. Nonetheless, a perioperative mortality rate of 24%, a 5-year limb loss rate of 33%, and 3-year graft thrombosis rate of 35% are testimony to the serious nature of aortic graft infection and the need to develop better methods to prevent this complication.     

The management of aortoenteric and paraprosthetic fistulae

Aortoenteric and aortic paraprosthetic fistulae are devastating complications. Most authors recommend total excision of the graft and revascularization of the lower extremities by extra-anatomic bypass. We reviewed the University of Pittsburgh experience with these fistulae in 15 patients between 1977 and 1987. There were 9 aortoenteric fistulae (AEF) and 6 paraprosthetic fistulae (PPF). Seven of the 9 AEF had no abscess surrounding the graft, but communication of the intestine with the aortic anastomosis. One patient died during operation. Six patients underwent a local repair or in situ replacement of the graft. All 6 of those patients survived operation without limb loss. Two of the 9 patients with AEF had evidence of graft infection and underwent total excision of the graft and extra-anatomic reconstruction. Both patients died, one of sepsis and one of aortic stump rupture. All 6 patients with PPF had clinical and operative evidence of overt graft infection and underwent total graft excision and extra-anatomic bypass. Two of these patients died secondary to sepsis. We conclude that AEF, without evidence of graft infection, were safely treated by local repair. Patients with PPF had infected grafts requiring graft removal with significant morbidity and mortality.     

Management of aortic graft infection

BACKGROUND: The optimal method of operative treatment of prosthetic aortic graft infection (PAGI) has been the subject of debate; incidence rates of PAGI are low. Diagnosis of PAGI can be difficult. The aim of this retrospective study is to evaluate our results in treating PAGI in order to try and optimize the treatment of this grave problem. METHODS: Thirty-eight patients (median age 68.5 years) were treated for PAGI between 1991 and 2000. Management of PAGI was performed with total graft excision and simultaneous extra-anatomic bypass (n=18), total graft excision and in situ repair with a Rifampicin-soaked gelatin-impregnated prosthetic aortic graft (n=8), or a partial excision with in situ repair (n=11). In 1 patient, only local irrigation was performed. The median follow-up was 45 months. RESULTS: Clinical presentation of PAGI (median interval 3 years) was: discomfort/pain (n=14), gastro-intestinal bleeding (n=11), persisting fever (n=8), or a non-healing wound (n=5). The primary patency rate in patients with extra-anatomic bypass was 67% at 6 months follow-up. In patients with other surgical reconstructions no graft occlusion was encountered. Overall amputation rate was 5%. Recurrent infection of the graft was 15%. The overall early mortality rate in this study was 21%. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnosis of PAGI is difficult and should be based on a combination of clinical symptoms, laboratory findings and imaging techniques. There are several treatment options that should be tailored to the extent of infection and the patients' physical condition. In a selected group of patients partial excision of the infected graft only can be justified.     

Aortic and peripheral prosthetic graft infection: differential management and causes of mortality

This report of 25 patients with prosthetic graft infection has compared the diagnosis, management, and outcome in 14 patients with infected aortic grafts with 11 patients with infected peripheral grafts (two axillofemorofemoral, five femorofemoral, five femoropopliteal, and one femoral interposition). Peripheral graft infection had a significantly shorter interval to diagnosis compared with aortic graft infection. Total graft removal combined with either autogenous revascularization or extraanatomic bypass using prosthetic graft was performed in all 14 patients with infected aortic grafts. Management of peripheral graft infection consisted of total graft removal in eight patients (four with autogenous revascularization and two with amputation) and partial graft removal in three patients (two with amputation). Mortality and amputation rates for infected aortic grafts were 43 percent and 25 percent, respectively compared with 36 percent and 27 percent for infected peripheral grafts. Recommendations for management of the infected aortic prosthetic graft include total graft removal, but methods and timing of revascularization are dependent on the specific features of the individual case. However, preferred management for the infected peripheral prosthetic graft includes total graft removal and, if indicated, revascularization using autogenous tissue.     

Outcomes in the management of vascular prosthetic graft infections confined to the groin: A reappraisal

The management of vascular prosthetic graft infections confined to the groin continues to be controversial. To critically evaluate this problem, we reviewed the records of our vascular registry from December 1992 through February 1995 and found 17 incidences of groin sepsis involving a vascular prosthesis in 10 patients. These included a proximal prosthetic femoropopliteal bypass (n=6), an aortobifemoral graft limb (n=5), an ileofemoral bypass (n=3), a prosthetic femoral patch (n = 2), and an aortofemoral/femorofemoral bypass (n=1). The mean age of these patients was 65 years. Six patients were diabetic, four were on systemic steroids, and two were diabetic and on steroids. All infections were Szilagyi grade III including three in which the patients presented with local hemorrhage. Treatment consisted of irrigation, radical debridement with or without in situ graft replacement, and local rotational muscle flap coverage in nine cases, graft excision with extra-anatomic (obturator ileofemoral bypass) graft replacement in six cases, and excision alone in two cases. Of the 17 infections treated operatively and followed from 1 week to 18 months (median 5 months), eight (47%) showed no evidence of recurrence, six (35%) recurred, two (12%) caused early death, and one resulted in a thrombosed graft requiring extra-anatomic reconstruction. Of the nine infected grafts treated locally with muscle flaps, six showed recurrent infection from 3 weeks to 15 months and one thrombosed for a total local treatment failure rate of 78%. Only two grafts are free of infection at 4 and 5 months, respectively. Of the six incidences of infection treated with obturator bypass, four (66%) are free of infection and two resulted in patient death; both infections treated with excision alone were eradicated but resulted in a major lower extremity amputation. These data question the growing acceptance of debridement and local muscle flap coverage for the treatment of all prosthetic vascular graft infections confined to the groin, especially in patients who are diabetic or on systemic steroids.Presented at the Twentieth Annual Meeting of the Peripheral Vascular Surgery Society, New Orleans, La., June 10, 1995.     

Infected lower extremity extra-anatomic bypass grafts: Management of a serious complication in high-risk patients

To determine optimal management and outcome of infected extra-anatomic bypass grafts (EABG), we reviewed 28 patients (19 men and 9 women; mean age 70 years) treated over a 13-year period. Mean follow-up was 42 months. There were 16 axillofemoral (AF), 10 femorofemoral (FF), and two axillopopliteal (AP) grafts. Risk factors included previous prosthetic graft infection in 13 patients, enterocutaneous fistula in two, and mycotic aortic aneurysm in one. Initial management involved complete graft excision in 12 patients, partial graft excision in 10, and nonresectional therapy in six. Failure of nonresectional therapy and partial excision in three patients each required further operative intervention with graft excision. Reconstruction in patients eventually requiring graft excision (n=25) entailed placement of a new prosthetic AF or AP graft in eight, an autogenous FF graft in five, combined prosthetic AF and autogenous FF bypass in two, autogenous iliofemoral bypass in one, obturator bypass in one, or no reconstruction in eight. Four autogenous FF reconstructions thrombosed immediately postoperatively, and three prosthetic reconstructions became infected. The mortality rate was 18% (FF=20%, AF=19%, AP=0%). The amputation rate was 25% (AP=100%, AF=25%, FF=10%) and was higher without arterial reconstruction (56% vs. 12%,p=0.02). Two patients required hemipelvectomies and one had bilateral hip disarticulation. We conclude that EABG infections can be successfully treated but carry significant morbidity and mortality. Optimal management includes EABG resection and prompt revascularization, bearing in mind the risk of early thrombosis in autogenous grafts and reinfection in prosthetic grafts.Presented at the Thirteenth Annual Meeting of the Southern California Vascular Surgical Society, Coronado, Calif., September 16–18, 1994.     

Aortic graft infections: replacement with autogenous vein

The purpose of this review article is to summarize our published experience with the use of the superficial femoral-popliteal vein (SFPV) to replace infected aortic prostheses. The SFPV has proven to be resistant to infections of all types and has shown no signs of degeneration over the long term. Since SFPV bypass and prosthetic graft excision are performed as a single stage, operative times are extensive. Therefore, it may not be appropriate for the sickest patients with severe medical comorbidities. Nevertheless, the operation has been associated with gratifyingly low mortality and amputation rates that are far better than published rates associated with graft excision and extra-anatomic bypass. It is particularly suited to patients with complex aortofemoral graft reconstructions who cannot undergo extra-anatomic revascularization for technical reasons. The venous sequella of SFPV harvest are minimal. These data and those from three other centers support the conclusion that graft excision and replacement with SFPV is an excellent alternative for treatment of aortic graft infections.     

Management of aortic prosthetic infections

Infections of aortic vascular prostheses remain a dreaded complication. Although removal of the graft has generally been recommended in the literature, the role of lesser procedures, the need for alternate revascularization, and a precise plan of attack are ill defined. We have treated 18 patients with infection of aortic prostheses. Specific risk factors potentially promoting infection included reoperation, septic complications, or gastrointestinal entry at the time of graft placement. Clinical signs of infection included chronic draining sinus in eight patients, localized groin abscess in three patients, groin swelling in four patients, gastrointestinal bleeding in two patients, and pseudoaneurysm in one patient. Treatment by local therapy, including catheter irrigation of sinus tracts, debridement, and local antibiotics, resulted in failure in eight of nine patients. If the sinogram of a groin sinus showed no communication with the body of the graft, resection of a graft limb was successful in 66 percent of the patients. If the sinus communicated with the body of the graft, total resection was mandatory. When total excision was necessary, all patients required revascularization by means of an extraanatomic bypass. The mortality rate was 33 percent and was primarily due to bleeding fistulas. An aggressive approach to this serious problem with early graft excision is encouraged.     

Priority of revascularization in patients with graft enteric fistulas, infected arteries, or infected arterial prostheses.

Patients with arterial infections, infected arterial prostheses, or graft enteric erosions or fistulas have high amputation and mortality rates after treatment. An unresolved therapeutic question is whether remote ("extra-anatomic") bypass should precede or follow removal of the infected artery or prosthesis. None of the ten patients reported here who had a remote bypass inserted first developed distal limb ischemia or infection of the remote bypass. Literature review of patients with aortic prosthetic infections revealed a mortality of 71% (10/14) if infected graft removal preceded remote bypass and 26% (6/23) if remote bypass was first. Patients with graft enteric erosions or fistulas had a mortality of 53% (40/75) if graft removal was first and 17% (5/29) if remote bypass was first. Subsequent infection of the remote bypass was rare. Therefore, when possible, remote bypass with a prosthetic graft should precede removal of an infected artery, an infected arterial prosthesis, a graft enteric erosion, or a graft enteric fistula.     

Influence of Patient Characteristics and Treatment Options on Outcome of Patients with Prosthetic Aortic Graft Infection

This study was undertaken to determine the influence of patient characteristics and treatment options on survival and limb loss after treatment of prosthetic aortic graft infection. Fifty-three patients treated for prosthetic aortic graft infection were reviewed. Twenty-three presented with groin infection, 12 with sepsis, 10 with aortoenteric fistula, 4 with limb ischemia, and 4 with pseudoaneurysm. Treatment included staged extraanatomic bypass (EAB) plus graft excision in 23 patients, simultaneous EAB and graft excision in 18, in situ graft replacement in 5, and local therapy only in 7. Axillofemoral bypass was done for revascularization in 53 limbs and axillopopliteal bypass in 16 limbs. The results of this study showed that morbidity and mortality of prosthetic aortic graft infection is influenced by the presentation and type of treatment of the infected graft. Staged axillofemoral bypass (when possible) plus graft excision appears to be associated with acceptable outcome (survival with limb salvage in 74%).     

A modified method for management of prosthetic graft infections involving an anastomosis to the common femoral artery

In the last 10 years we have treated 28 patients with 33 groin infections involving a common femoral artery anastomosis of prosthetic arterial grafts (2 aortic Dacron grafts, 31 peripheral polytetrafluoroethylene grafts). Management included complete graft preservation for patent infected grafts (11 cases), subtotal excision of occluded infected grafts leaving an oversewn 2 to 3 mm graft remnant attached to a patent artery critical for limb survival (16 cases), and total graft excision with arterial oversewing or ligation for anastomotic bleeding (6 cases). Essential treatment adjuncts included (1) radical operative wound debridement, and (2) secondary revascularization by means of bypasses tunneled via lateral uninfected routes, and unusual approaches to uninvolved patent outflow arteries (i.e., the distal superficial or deep femoral or popliteal arteries) after isolation of the infected wound. Follow-up averaged 3 years (1 to 10 years). This plan of treatment resulted in an 11% (3/28) hospital mortality and an amputation rate of 13% (4/30 threatened limbs). Of the 25 survivors with 30 infected groin grafts, 87% (26) of the wounds healed uneventfully by secondary intention within 1 to 8 weeks (mean, 4 weeks) and have remained healed. One infected groin wound did not heal and required delayed total graft excision. Three patients had late anastomotic disruption with hemorrhage at 8 months, 2 years, and 4 years after initial treatment. This selected use of complete or partial graft preservation and other essential treatment adjuncts are proposed as a safer, easier method for managing infected prosthetic arterial grafts in the groin.     

Improving survival and limb salvage in patients with aortic graft infection

A 15-year experience with 38 aortic graft infections, including 15 patients with graft enteric fistulas, is reviewed in order to analyze modern-day surgical results utilizing extra-anatomic bypass and aortic graft excision. Perioperative mortality was 14% during the most recent 7-year interval, which was a notable improvement compared with the earlier time interval (p = 0.06). Extended follow-up of the perioperative survivors demonstrated a 77% cumulative 5-year survival and a 76% cumulative 5-year limb salvage rate. Subsequent axillofemoral graft infection occurred in 22% of survivors and resulted in a significantly higher amputation rate compared with those patients with no axillofemoral graft infection (p less than 0.001). The results suggest good perioperative and long-term survival in patients with aortic graft infection, with excellent limb salvage if subsequent axillofemoral graft infection can be avoided.     

Axillo-femoral bypass and simultaneous removal of the aorto-femoral vascular infection site: is the procedure safe?

In a retrospective analysis 12 patients treated for aorto-femoral vascular infections between 1984 and 1990 were evaluated. They were all male with a mean age of 63 years. Indications for treatment were: mycotic aneurysms-3, primary aorto-enteric fistula-2 and graft infection-7. Surgical treatment consisted of implantation of an extra-anatomic bypass, carefully avoiding the infected area, followed by removal of the infected graft and tissue at the same session. There was no early mortality (less than 30 days) but the first year mortality was 42% (n = 5). Causes of death were: aortic stump disruption (n = 1), recurrence of aorto-enteric fistula (n = 2), axillary anastomosis disruption (n = 1), cardiac failure (n = 1). Orthotopic reconstruction of the aorta after 12 months, as we advocate, was accomplished in two patients and is scheduled in another one. In two patients their poor condition precluded this second step, and in two further patients above-knee amputation with subsequent extra-anatomic graft removal was needed. Only one of the 12 extra-anatomic bypasses became infected. Reconstruction by axillo-femoral bypass combined with removal of the aorto-femoral graft at the same session is a practicable procedure with good early results. However, the rate of successful orthotopic reconstruction of the aorta after 12 months is low because of a high mortality rate, especially in the presence of aorto-enteric fistulas, and because some patients with well functioning axillo-femoral grafts are in too poor condition for another large operation.     

Hybrid aortoiliac revascularization to avoid nonautogenous groin reconstruction in an intravenous drug abuser

Traditional methods for revascularization of an occluded aortoiliac system have necessitated either in-line aortic reconstruction through an aortobifemoral bypass or extra-anatomic bypass. However, both these approaches require artificial material to be placed in the groin. The consequence of groin infection can be devastating leading to high rates of both limb loss and mortality. One of the most feared patient populations presenting with groin complications is that of the intravenous drug abuser. We present the case of a patient with a long history of intravenous drug abuse with severe aortoiliac disease. Instead of resorting to a more traditional open surgical approach necessitating artificial reconstruction in the groin, we chose to proceed with a hybrid open and endovascular procedure through a direct open surgical access to the aortic bifurcation. This allowed for revascularization without the placement of artificial material in the groin.     

Obturator bypass: a classic approach for the treatment of contemporary groin infection

As the number of cardiac and interventional radiologic procedures has risen, the frequency with which surgeons are called to treat groin complications has increased. Infectious groin problems that often involve foreign prosthetic material or remnants of percutaneous femoral closure devices are particularly challenging and require control of bleeding, removal of foreign material, wide debridement, and sometimes arterial resection. Management of the consequential limb ischemia in such cases is controversial. The purpose of this study is to review the utility of extra-anatomic common femoral bypass through the obturator foramen (obturator bypass) as a method of treating limb ischemia after arterial groin infection. From July 1992 through June 2001 a total of 12 patients (six male) presented with severe vascular infections of the groin and underwent obturator bypass. Infections occurred as a consequence of an isolated vascular graft infection (nine) or after a percutaneous interventional femoral access procedure (three). Patients presented with systemic sepsis and a draining sinus (six), infected pseudoaneurysm (two), or hemorrhage (four). Treatment included debridement of the groin wound, sartorius muscle flap coverage of the femoral vessels, antibiotics and synthetic (eight polytetrafluoroethylene and four Dacron) obturator bypass via a lower abdominal extraperitoneal incision from an aortobifemoral bypass graft limb to the superficial femoral artery (six), native iliac to femoral artery (three), iliac to popliteal artery (two), and aortobifemoral bypass limb to the popliteal artery (one). Graft patency and limb salvage were assessed by Kaplan-Meier life table analysis. There were two (17%) deaths (multisystem organ failure at postoperative days 9 and 6) and four major complications (25%) requiring reoperation in the first 30 days. Ten patients (83%) survived, healed their groin wounds, and are infection free. With a mean follow-up of 37 months graft patency and limb salvage at 60 months were 80 and 60 per cent, respectively. There were no late graft infections. We conclude that the obturator bypass is an effective and durable means of revascularization in the presence of the septic groin. This procedure belongs in the armamentarium of all surgeons managing these complications.     

The results of in situ prosthetic replacement for infected aortic grafts.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of aortic graft infection with graft excision and axillofemoral bypass may carry an increased risk of limb loss, aortic stump blowout, and pelvic ischemia. A review of patients with aortic graft infection treated with in situ prosthetic graft replacement was undertaken to determine if mortality, limb loss, and reinfection rates were improved with this technique. METHODS: The clinical data of 25 patients, 19 males and 6 females, with a mean age of 68 years (range 35 to 83), with aortic graft infection, treated between January 1, 1989, and December 31, 1998, by in situ prosthetic graft replacement were reviewed. Follow-up was complete in the 23 surviving patients and averaged 36 months (range 4 to 103). RESULTS: Twenty aortofemoral, 3 aortoiliac, and 2 straight aortic graft infections were treated with excision and in situ replacement with standard polyester grafts in 16 patients (64%), or with rifampin-soaked collagen or gelatin-impregnated polyester grafts in 9 patients (36%). Fifteen patients (60%) had aortic graft enteric fistulas, 8 patients (32%) had abscesses or draining sinuses, and 2 patients (8%) had bacterial biofilm infections. Thirty-day mortality was 8% (2 of 25). There were no early graft occlusions or amputations. There was one late graft occlusion. There were no late amputations. The reinfection rate was 22% (5 grafts). All reinfections occurred in patients operated upon for occlusive disease. Only one reinfection occurred in the rifampin-soaked graft group (11% versus 29%, P = NS). Reinfection tended to be lower in patients with aortoenteric fistulas and without abscess. Autogenous tissue coverage provided statistically significant protection against reinfection. There were no late deaths related to in situ graft infection. CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with in situ graft replacement had an 8% mortality and 100% limb salvage rate. Reinfection rates were similar to those of extra-anatomic bypass, but a trend of lower reinfection rates with rifampin-impregnated grafts was apparent. Patients with aortoenteric fistula and without abscess appear to be well treated by the technique of in situ prosthetic grafting and autogenous tissue coverage.     

In-situ replacement and extra-anatomic bypass for the treatment of infected abdominal aortic grafts

We reviewed the surgical results of 21 patients who had infected abdominal aortic grafts to determine the efficacy of in-situ graft replacement and extra-anatomic bypass in the management of these patients. Twelve patients had a primary perigraft infection, and nine had an infection secondary to an aortoenteric fistula (AEF). Whereas the infected graft was replaced with a new aortic prosthesis in 18 patients, an axillobifemoral bypass operation followed graft excision in three patients. Twelve of the graft replacement patients (two AEF patients) had a low-grade infection, with negative perigraft and blood cultures. All 12 patients were alive at a mean follow-up of 8 years. Two had required above-knee amputation because of severe occlusive disease, and one had required an axillobifemoral bypass because of reinfection. The remaining six graft replacement patients (five AEF patients) had severe graft infections, with positive perigraft fluid and blood cultures in which one or more bacteria were present. Five died of sepsis within 1 month of operation. The remaining patient, who later required an axillobifemoral bypass because of reinfection, was alive at follow-up 4.3 years after operation. The three patients (two AEF patients) who had axillobifemoral bypasses had severe graft infections, with positive perigraft fluid and blood cultures. They survived the extra-anatomic bypass operation and were alive at a mean follow-up of 4.5 years. We conclude that patients who have a low-grade graft infection and negative blood and perigraft cultures can be treated safely by graft excision and in-situ replacement with a new prosthesis.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)