Infected femorodistal bypass: is graft removal mandatory?

Infected lower extremity bypass grafts have been associated with high rates of limb loss. Traditionally treatment has included graft excision. To compare aggressive local treatment, without graft removal, with more conventional graft excision, we reviewed 38 consecutive patients with 39 infected lower extremity bypasses treated during the last 10 years. The grafts used were prosthetic in 33 cases, vein in 4, and composite in 2. Median follow-up was 2.7 years. Twenty-eight infected grafts were treated with either complete (14) or partial (14) graft removal. Nine new grafts were placed. Recurrent infection developed in five cases, and two patients died of complications of graft infection. Ten of 20 limbs at risk were lost. Eleven patients with patent bypasses (4 vein, 2 composite, 5 prosthetic) were treated without graft excision. Treatment of five patients in this group included muscle transposition. Five patients were treated with incision and drainage of abscesses, and one had excision of a persistent sinus tract. One patient underwent major amputation 6.3 years after treatment of graft infection. Limb salvage was significantly higher (p = 0.012, log-rank test) than in patients treated with graft excision. One patient died, and no recurrent infections developed; these were not significant differences compared with those having graft excision. We conclude that aggressive local treatment of infected lower extremity bypass grafts, including drainage, debridement, and muscle transposition may treat infection in selected patients without the need for graft removal and with rates of limb salvage superior to those obtained with excisional therapy.     

Use of rifampin-soaked gelatin-sealed polyester grafts for in situ treatment of primary aortic and vascular prosthetic infections

BACKGROUND: In situ treatment of artery/graft infection has distinct advantages compared to vessel excision and extra-anatomic bypass procedures. Based on animal studies of a rifampin-soaked, gelatin-impregnated polyester graft that demonstrated prolonged in vivo antibacterial activity, this antibiotic-bonded graft was used selectively in patients for in situ treatment of low-grade Gram-positive prosthetic graft infections or primary aortic infections not amenable to excision and ex situ bypass. METHODS: In a 5-year period (1995-1999), 27 patients with prosthetic graft infection (aortofemoral, n = 18, femorofemoral, n = 3; axillofemoral, n = 1) or primary aortic infection (mycotic aneurysm, n = 3; infected AAA, n = 2) underwent excision of the infected vessel and in situ replacement with a rifampin soaked (45-60 mg/ml for 15 min) gelatin-impregnated polyester graft. All prosthetic graft infections were low grade in nature, caused Gram-positive bacteria (Staphylococcus epidermidis, 16; Staphylococcus aureus, 5; Streptococcus, 1), and were treated electively. Patients with mycotic aortic aneurysm presented with sepsis and underwent urgent or emergent surgery. RESULTS: Two (8%) patients died-1 as a result of a ruptured Salmonella mycotic aortic aneurysm and the other from methicillin-resistant S. aureus infection following deep vein replacement of an in situ replaced femorofemoral graft. No amputations or late deaths as the result of vascular infection occurred in the 25 surviving patients. Two patients developed recurrent infection caused by a rifampin-resistant S. epidermidis in a replaced aortofemoral graft limb and were successfully treated with graft excision and in situ autogenous vein replacement. Eighteen patients remain alive and clinically free of infection after a mean follow-up interval of 17 months. CONCLUSIONS: In situ replacement treatment using a rifampin-bonded prosthetic graft for low-grade staphylococcal arterial infection was safe, durable, and associated with eradication of clinical signs of infection. Failure of this therapy was the result of virulent and antibiotic-resistant bacterial strains.     

Long-term results of cryopreserved arterial allograft reconstruction in infected prosthetic grafts and mycotic aneurysms of the abdominal aorta.

PURPOSE: This prospective, observational study determined the long-term outcome in patients with abdominal aortic infection (primary or prosthetic graft) who were treated with simultaneous aortic/graft excision and cryopreserved arterial allograft reconstruction. METHODS: From April 1992 to March 2000, patients with abdominal aortic infection underwent complete or partial excision of the infected aorta/prosthetic graft and cryopreserved arterial allograft reconstruction. Arterial allografts were harvested from multiple organ donors and cryopreserved at -80 degrees C without rate-controlled freezing. The patients were observed for survival, limb salvage, persistence and/or recurrence of infection, and allograft patency. The results were calculated with life-table methods. RESULTS: During the 8-year study period, 28 consecutive patients (27 men, 1 woman; mean age, 64 years) underwent treatment for abdominal aortic infection (23 graft infections, including 7 graft-enteric fistulas and 5 primary aortic infections). Allograft reconstruction was performed as an emergency procedure in 13 patients (46%). The mean follow-up period was 35.4 months (range, 6-101 months). The overall treatment-related mortality rate was 17.8% (17% for graft infection, 20% for primary aortic infection). The overall 3-year survival was 67%. There was no early or late amputation. There was no persistent or recurrent infection, and none of the patients received long-term (> 3 months) antibiotic therapy. Reoperation for allograft revision, excision, or replacement was necessary in four patients (17%) who were available for examination, with no reoperative perioperative death. The 3-year primary and secondary allograft patency rates were 81% and 96%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our experience with cryopreserved arterial allograft in the management of abdominal aortic infection suggests that this technique seems to be a useful option for treating one of the most dreaded vascular 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.     

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.     

The management of the infected aortic prosthesis: A current decade of experience

Purpose: Newer approaches to the patient with an infected aortic graft are available. We reviewed a recent 10-year experience with a more traditional approach to evaluate its outcome in the 1990s.Methods: From January 1983 to January 1993, 27 patients with an aortic graft infection were treated at our institution. There were 18 paraprosthetic infections, eight graft enteric erosions, and one aortoduodenal fistula. The involved bypasses included 20 aortofemoral (74%), five aortoiliac (18%), and two aortic tube grafts (8%). Nineteen aortic replacements were done originally for aneurysmal disease (70%). We reviewed the outcome of each patient treated as it related to the method of management. The therapy for graft infection consisted of aortic graft removal and axillofemoral bypass in 20 patients (74%), treatment by an in situ method in four patients (15%), excision of an aortofemoral limb and extraanatomic bypass in two patients (7%), and extraanatomic bypass alone in one patient (4%). In the group treated by graft removal and extraanatomic bypass, four patients (20%) had staged operations (extraanatomic bypass followed by interval aortic graft removal), nine (45%) had single operations with extraanatomic bypass preceding graft removal, and seven (35%) had single operations with graft removal preceding extraanatomic bypass.Results: The 30-day operative mortality rate was 3.7%. There were no instances of aortic stump blowout. The 3-year primary patency rate for axillofemoral bypass limbs was 80.2%, and the secondary patency rate was 87.4%. No limbs were lost as a result of ischemic complications. There was one late amputation for an unrelated problem.Conclusions: The results of alternate approaches to the management of patients with infected aortic grafts were equivalent both in terms of perioperative mortality and morbidity rates in this group of patients. Complete excision of the aortic graft with axillofemoral bypass provided a satisfactory long-term outcome and remains the standard with which other approaches must be compared. (J VASC SURG 1994;19:844-50.)     

Experience with cryopreserved arterial allografts in the treatment of prosthetic graft infections

The authors present a retrospective study on 30 patients with prosthetic graft infection. Included are 25 patients with aortic graft infection, three with infection of a femorodistal bypass and two with infected axillofemoral grafts. There were 23 isolated primary prosthetic graft infections and seven aorto-enteric fistulas. Treatment consisted of graft excision and replacement with cryopreserved arterial homografts, harvested from brain-death multi-organ donors. The in situ technique was used in 27 cases. Eight patients died postoperatively and two deaths were from allograft related complications. The operative mortality rate was 11% for isolated aortic graft sepsis and the early limb salvage rate was 100%. Persistent or recurrent infection was noted in two cases. The mean follow-up of the series was 24.5 months and occlusive complications occurred in five patients (23%), which resulted in two major amputations. Serial CT scans showed abnormalities in six of the 22 survivors, all of them related to the aortic segment of the allograft. It is concluded that in situ reconstruction with cryopreserved arterial allografts represents an acceptable alternative, especially in the treatment of isolated aortic graft sepsis. Continued follow-up towards late deterioration and/or occlusive complications remains mandatory.     

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.     

Diagnosis and management of infected prosthetic aortic grafts

Infection of an aortic prosthetic graft represents one of the most difficult diagnostic and therapeutic challenges to the vascular surgeon. The presentation of this complication, the degree of ischemia of the lower extremities, and the overall medical status of the patient determine the urgency and optimal treatment to maximize limb salvage and survival. Although partial or total graft preservation can be a treatment option if the infection is localized to the distal limb of an aortofemoral graft and all anastomoses are intact, treatment of an infected aortic prosthetic graft often requires total graft excision, preferably preceded by revascularization of the lower extremities through lateral uninfected routes. Careful selection of the many time-honored and newly developed diagnostic and treatment modalities is necessary to lower morbidity and mortality rates in patients with this complication.     

Delayed aortic prosthetic reconstruction after removal of an infected graft

The amputation morbidity associated with the treatment of vascular graft infection continues to be a major clinical problem. Late amputation associated with failure of extraanatomic bypass initially required to avoid infected tissue beds might be reduced if delayed anatomic aortic prosthetic reconstruction could be safely employed. Two major concerns about this treatment option are the safety of the redo aortic reconstruction and the risk of recurrent infection in the reimplanted graft. Seven patients in whom recurrent limb ischemia or extraanatomic bypass infection developed underwent delayed aortic reconstruction using either an in-line aortic graft or supraceliac aortofemoral bypass at a mean interval of 14.5 months after removal of the infected graft. There were no perioperative deaths, and six of seven patients were well at a mean follow-up of 57 months postoperatively. All grafts remained patent throughout the follow-up period and no further amputations were required. No reimplanted graft became infected, which suggests that a reimplantation interval of 6 to 12 months may be safe. These data indicate that delayed aortic prosthetic reconstruction may be considered a safe and effective treatment option for those patients in whom limb-threatening recurrent ischemia or recurrent extraanatomic graft infection develops after treatment of aortic vascular graft infection.     

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.     

Redo aortic grafting after treatment of aortic graft infection

Purpose: This study was performed to determine the indications, operative strategy, and hemodynamic benefit of redo aortic grafting procedures after earlier excision of an infected aortic graft.Methods: Among 164 patients treated for aortic graft infection, 15 later underwent redo aortic grafting procedures an average of 18 months (range, 1 to 59 months) after removal of an infected aortic graft. Redo grafting procedures were performed for leg ischemia (n = 11) or infection (proven, n = 3; suspected, n = 1). The new aortic graft originated either from the distal thoracic aorta (n = 5) or from the juxtarenal aortic stump (n = 10). Follow-up averaged 56 months (range, 7 to 110 months).Results: All patients survived the redo grafting procedure. In the eleven patients who had ischemic symptoms, redo grafting procedures uniformly resulted in symptomatic improvement with an increase in ankle-brachial indexes (0.78 ± 0.34 vs 0.50 ± 0.29; p = 0.02). A graft limb occlusion developed in two of these patients (3 and 6 months), but no limbs were amputated. In the four patients who had proven or suspected extraanatomic bypass graft infection, there was one graft limb occlusion (29 months) and one amputation (17 months). Overall, recurrent graft infection occurred in three of 15 patients and may be more frequent in patients who have a proven extraanatomic bypass graft infection (2 of 3 vs 1 of 12; p = 0.08). Infection accounted for two of the three graft limb occlusions and two of the three late deaths. Recurrent infection was not associated with early (<1 year) regrafting procedures, and culture results did not correlate with the microbiologic features of the primary infection.Conclusions: Redo aortic grafting procedures can be performed safely and at relatively early intervals (6 to 12 months) after removal of the infected aortic graft. The procedure reliably relieves ischemic symptoms of the hemodynamically inadequate extraanatomic bypass graft. Reinfection remains a risk after redo aortic grafting procedures, particularly when treating established extraanatomic bypass graft infection. (J Vasc Surg 1996;24:328-37.)     

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.     

Infrascrotal, Perineal, Femorofemoral Bypass for Arterial Graft Infection at the Groin

HYPOTHESIS: Infrascrotal, perineal, femorofemoral bypass is an acceptable procedure for treating infection of a prosthetic arterial graft limited to a unilateral groin. DESIGN: A consecutive sample clinical study with a mean follow-up of 29 months. SETTING: The surgical department of an academic tertiary care center and an affiliated secondary care center. PATIENTS: Nineteen patients with a mean age of 68 years with prosthetic graft infection at the outflow anastomosis on a femoral artery at the Scarpa triangle underwent an infrascrotal, perineal, femorofemoral bypass, with excision of the graft material limited at the groin. The recipient artery was the profunda femoris artery in 12 cases, the superficial femoral in 5, and the distal common femoral artery in 2. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Cumulative survival, recurrence of sepsis, primary graft patency, and limb salvage rates expressed by standard life-table analysis. RESULTS: Postoperative mortality rate was 5%. Cumulative (SE) survival rate was 65% (11.6%) at 3 years. Cumulative (SE) rate of freedom from recurrent sepsis was 88% (8.6%) at 3 years. Cumulative (SE) primary patency and limb salvage rates were 86% (9.4%) and 91% (7.9%), respectively, at 3 years. CONCLUSION: Femorofemoral bypass with an infrascrotal perineal approach is a valuable procedure for the treatment of femoral arterial graft infection limited at a unilateral groin.     

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.     

Selective application of sartorius muscle flaps and aggressive staged surgical debridement can influence long-term outcomes of complex prosthetic graft infections

BACKGROUND: The complexity of variables associated with vascular surgical site infections (VSSI) often contribute adversely to reinfection, limb salvage, and mortality rates. This report details our experience with the selective use of a sartorius muscle flaps (SMF) as part of an overall treatment strategy focused on staged surgical debridement (SSD) to control prosthetic graft bed infection prior to a graft preservation or revision plan. METHODS: From our vascular registry, we identified 422 VSSI of which 89 (21%) had SMF for 24 aorto-bifemoral (ABF), 19 extra-anatomic bypasses (EAB), 34 infrainguinal bypasses, and 12 combined inflow/outflow reconstructions. All 86 patients had Szilagyi grade III prosthetic (Dacron-36, polytetrafluoroethylene [PTFE]-50) graft infections. The treatment algorithm included: SSD, culture-directed parenteral antibiotics, graft preservation (n = 3), or reconstruction (graft excision/EAB, n = 4; rifampin-bonded PTFE, n = 22; autologous conduit, n = 57) based on microbiology and consideration for SMF for extensive soft tissue defects (n = 43) or non-sterilized graft beds (n = 40). Analysis of microbiology, recurrent infection, vascular reconstruction, limb salvage, and mortality was completed over a mean follow-up of 52 months (range: 12 to 132 months). RESULTS: Thirty-day mortality was 2% with two aortic graft infections dying from sepsis. Survival by life table analysis at 1, 3, and 5 years was 94%, 92%, and 90%, respectively. Wound isolates were most commonly gram positive organisms (n = 58, 65%), with gram negative isolates and mixed infections accounting for 19% and 10%, respectively. A single recurrent groin infection was documented at 30 days. Freedom from recurrent infection (n = 6) at 1 and 5 years was 98% and 92% by life tables. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) was involved for 50% of reinfections. No amputations were attributable to uncontrolled VSSI and graft patency was 100% in surveillance monitored patients. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that selective utilization of SMF as part of SSD treatment plan in an attempt to achieve graft bed sterilization can effectively control the complex infectious process allowing for potentially improved outcomes for in situ or preservation graft salvage techniques. Lifelong graft surveillance is recommended.     

Expanded application of in situ replacement for prosthetic graft infection

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to analyze the outcome of an individualized treatment algorithm for prosthetic graft infection, including the application of in situ graft replacement, based on clinical presentation, extent of graft infection, and microbiology. METHODS: There was a retrospective review (1991-2000) of 119 patients with 68 aortoiliofemoral or 51 extracavitary (infrainguinal, 19; axillofemoral, 16; femorofemoral, 16) prosthetic graft infections presenting more than 3 months (range, 3-136 months) after implantation/revision. The treatment algorithm consisted of graft excision with or without ex situ bypass grafts for patients presenting with sepsis or graft-enteric erosion, whereas in situ replacement (autogenous vein, rifampin-bonded polyester, polytetrafluoroethylene [PTFE]) was used in patients with less virulent gram-positive graft infection, in particular infections caused by Staphylococcus epidermidis. Outcomes (death, limb loss, recurrent infection) were correlated with treatment type and infecting organism. RESULTS: In situ replacement was used in 52% of aortoiliofemoral (autogenous vein, 10; rifampin-bonded polyester, 6; PTFE, 9) and 80% of extracavitary (autogenous vein, 26; PTFE, 9; rifampin, 6) graft infections. Total graft excision with ex situ bypass was performed in 34 patients, including 21 patients with graft-enteric erosion/fistula, with a 21% operative mortality and 9% amputation rate. In situ graft replacement was used to treat 76 graft infections with a 30-day operative mortality rate of 4% and an amputation rate of 2%. Graft excision alone was performed in nine patients with one 30-day death. Gram-positive cocci were the prevalent infecting organisms of both intracavitary (59% of isolates) and extracavitary (76% of isolates) graft infections. S epidermidis was the infecting organism in 40% of patients, accounting for the expanded application of in situ prosthetic replacement using a rifampin-bonded polyester or PTFE prosthesis. During the mean follow-up interval of 26 months, recurrent graft infection developed in 3% (1 of 34) of patients after conventional treatment, 3% (1 of 36) patients after in situ vein replacement, and 10% (4 of 40) patients after in situ prosthetic graft replacement (P >.05). Failure of in situ replacement procedures was the result of virulent and antibiotic-resistant bacterial strains. CONCLUSIONS: In situ replacement was a safe and durable option in most (64%) patients presenting with prosthetic graft infection. In situ replacement with a rifampin-bonded graft was effective for S epidermidis graft infection, but when the entire prosthesis is involved with either a biofilm or invasive perigraft infection, in situ autogenous vein replacement is preferred. Virulent graft infections presenting with sepsis, anastomotic dehiscence, or graft enteric fistula should continue to be treated with total graft excision, and if feasible, staged ex situ bypass graft.     

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.     

Early and long-term results of conventional surgical treatment of secondary aorto-enteric fistula.

OBJECTIVE: To retrospectively evaluate early and late results of surgical treatment of secondary aorto-enteric fistulas (SAEFs) with prosthetic excision and extra-anatomic bypass (conventional treatment) in a single centre institution (teaching hospital). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between January 1990 and March 2002, 30 patients underwent conventional surgical treatment for SAEF. Data concerning these operations were collected in a dedicate database and 30-day mortality, patency and limb salvage rates were evaluated by mean of chi-square test and logistic regression analysis. Clinical and ultrasonographic follow-up was performed; late results were evaluated by mean of Kaplan-Meyer curves. RESULTS: Thirty day mortality rate was 26% (8 patients). Timing and sequence of interventions (simultaneous or staged, prosthetic excision or revascularization before) had no significative influence on perioperative mortality. There were six extranatomic bypass thromboses at 30 days, but no amputation. Mean duration of follow-up was 24 months; estimated 12- and 24-month survival rates were 60 and 50%, respectively. There were better results in terms of long-term survival in patients undergone prosthetic graft excision before. Primary patency rate was 62% and limb salvage rate was 95%, both at 24 months. Two prosthetic graft reinfections occurred during follow-up (9%). Cumulative reinterventions rate during follow-up was 18%. CONCLUSIONS: Conventional surgical treatment of SAEF permitted, in our experience, satisfactory early and long terms results, with fair rates of patency and limb salvage. Surgical timing and sequence do not seem to affect early results.     

The impact of MRSA on vascular surgery.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the prevalence of MRSA infection in patients treated in a major vascular unit and examine its consequences. DESIGN AND METHODS: A retrospective case-note review was performed. RESULTS: During the period 1993 to 2000, a total of 172 patients (4.4% of total) were positive for MRSA. Of these 97 were colonised and 75 were infected by MRSA. The proportion of wound or graft infections caused by MRSA has increased (4% in 1994 to 63% in 2000). Three patients developed native artery infection (one following aortic stent insertion and 2 following embolectomy). All patients with aortic graft infection died. All patients with infected prosthetic infrainguinal bypass ended up with an amputation. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of MRSA infection is increasing. Infection of aortic grafts appears to be uniformly fatal and lower limb graft infection is associated with high limb loss.