Early pyrexia after endovascular aneurysm repair: are cultures needed?

INTRODUCTION

The post-implantation syndrome after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is increasingly recognised. However, when non-vascular trainees are responsible for the care of these patients out of hours, many are investigated if pyrexial. This study assesses the role of microbiological investigations in pyrexia after endovascular aneurysm repair.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The notes of 75 EVAR patients were reviewed retrospectively. The incidence of postoperative pyrexia and infective complications were calculated and the result of any cultures obtained.

RESULTS

Overall, 58 (77.3%) patients were pyrexial with 48 h of stent insertion. Twenty-four had blood cultures and 12 had urine cultures taken within 48 h of surgery. All of these cultures were negative. However, of those with a pyrexia after 48 h, one of nine blood cultures and two of 11 urine cultures grew organisms. Five pyrexial patients and one apyrexial patient developed a wound infection (a non-significant difference, P = 1.00).

CONCLUSIONS

Pyrexia within 48 h of EVAR is common. Microbiological investigation in the first 48 h in these patients is unrewarding. After 48 h, cultures are more likely to show growth. Although each patient must be assessed clinically for signs of sepsis, blood and urine cultures within 48 h of EVAR are generally unnecessary.     

Serological status: a predictor of response to intensive therapy in rheumatoid arthritis

BackgroundRheumatoid arthritis is the most common chronic inflammatory disease in the UK. Serological status such as rheumatoid factor (RF) and anti-citrullinated peptide antibody (ACPA) positivity predict poor outcomes. Early intensive treatment regimens targeting remission reduce disease activity, structural damage, and long-term disability. However, we do not know whether all patients with active disease should have such intensive treatment regimens. Can serological status be used to predict the need for intensive therapy?MethodsWe analysed samples from a published randomised controlled trial which compared four treatment regimens in patients with early active rheumatoid arthritis (disease duration <2 years): methotrexate monotherapy, double therapy (methotrexate plus either ciclosporin or prednisolone), and triple therapy (methotrexate plus ciclosporin plus prednisolone). The trial randomised 467 patients (68% female, median age 54 years [IQR 46–63]). Disease activity was assessed with the disease activity score of 28 joints (DAS28). Remission was defined as DAS28 less than 2·6 at 24 months. RF isotypes (IgM and IgA) and ACPA levels were measured with commercial ELISA kits. Statistical analysis used Pearson's chi-squared test.Findings402 (86%) patients were positive for IgM RF, 346 (74%) for IgA RF, and 346 (74%) for ACPA. 98 (21%) patients achieved remission at 24 months. In RF IgM negative cases (n=65) the proportion of patients achieving remission at 24 months was similar in all treatment groups (25%, 22%, and 30% for monotherapy, double therapy, and triple therapy, respectively). In RF IgM positive cases, significantly fewer patients achieved remission with monotherapy (13/65, 17%) and double therapy (24/157, 15%) than with triple therapy (27/80, 34%) (p=0·001). There were similar, consistent findings with IgA RF and ACPA, with significantly more seropositive patients achieving remission with triple therapy than with monotherapy.InterpretationContemporary treatment of rheumatoid arthritis emphasises the use of intensive therapy to achieve remission. However, we have shown that not all patients require such an aggressive approach to therapy. Given the heterogeneity of the diease, treatment should be personalised to the individual, which would minimise costs of treatment as well as potentially toxic side-effects. Our study shows that only seropositive patients with rheumatoid arthritis should be given more intensive therapies.FundingNational Institute for Health Research.