Mycotic/Infective Native Aortic Aneurysms: Results After Preferential Use of Open Surgery and Arterial Allografts

A Comparison of Surgical Techniques and Outcomes for Primary Infected Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms

BACKGROUND

Primary infected abdominal aortic aneurysms (PIAAAs) are associated with high morbidity and mortality. Three repair approaches include open in-situ repair (OIR), extra-anatomic repair (EAR), and endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). This study is one of the largest single-center case series comparing the outcomes of the different surgical approaches for PIAAA.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study of all patients treated surgically for PIAAA between 2000 and 2021. PIAAA diagnosis was defined as the presence of an abdominal aortic aneurysm with evidence of infection on clinical presentation, laboratory markers, radiology, or surgically. Patients with prior aortic surgery were excluded from this study. Basic demographics were compared across the 3 surgical groups using standard statistical methods. Our primary outcomes included mortality at 1 and 5 years. Kaplan-Meier curves were generated and compared using log-rank testing. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards models were created to assess determinants of mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 43 patients were included in the full cohort. Patients undergoing EVAR more often had diabetes, end-stage renal disease, and coronary artery disease. EVAR was also more often done in patients with a saccular aneurysm rather than fusiform. (93% vs. 70% in EAR and 42% in OIR; P = 0.015). All-cause mortality rates at 1 year were not significantly different between the 3 groups. Survival at 5 years did show a significant benefit of OIR over EVAR and EAR: OIR had an 8% mortality rate with EAR having a 53% rate and EVAR having the highest (72%) mortality rate at 5 years (P = 0.03). Multivariable Cox regression analysis showed that EVAR (aHR 12.1, (95% CI 1.42 to 103.9), P = 0.02) and EAR (aHR 15.1, (95% CI 1.59 to 143.3), P = 0.0.02) had an increased 5-year mortality risk when compared to OIR.

CONCLUSIONS

Repair of primary infected aortic aneurysm is associated with high complication and mortality rates regardless of the approach. In our studied sample, OIR offered an improved long-term survival without added benefits in terms of complication rates. In infected AAA, EVAR should be considered bridging stage between the urgent situation and eventual open repair.

Contemporary Outcomes of Endovascular and Open Surgical Repair for Mycotic Aortic Aneurysms: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

To perform a systematic review on contemporary outcomes of endovascular repair and open surgical repair (OSR) for the treatment of mycotic aortic aneurysm (MAA).

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search on the management of MAAs with endovascular repair or OSR was performed between January 1998 and January 2023. Patient demographics, early and late outcomes were analyzed with respect to treatment modality and MAA location.

RESULTS

Forty-eight articles were included, encompassing a total of 1,358 patients (75.8% male; mean age 66.9 years; 1,372 aneurysms) treated by open (49.8%) or endovascular (50.2%) repair. Salmonella spp., and Staphylococcus spp. were the most prevalent pathogens in Asian and European countries respectively. An increasing number of descending thoracic MAAs were managed by endovascular repair (27.9% vs. 12.8%). Early mortality rates for supra- and infra-renal MAAs managed by endovascular repair were lower than OSR (suprarenal 5.4% vs. 43.2%; infrarenal 1.8% vs. 16.7%). Overall, endovascular repair demonstrated lower intraoperative (1.0% vs. 1.8%) and early mortality (6.5% vs. 15.9) rates than OSR. However, endovascular repair was associated with higher late sepsis rate (5.7% vs. 0.9%) and reintervention rate (17.6% vs. 7.3%). Pooled survival rates at 1- and 5-year were similar between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Current literature suggest that endovascular repair is an effective and safe alternative to OSR for descending thoracic, suprarenal, and infrarenal MAAs. However, endovascular repair is associated with higher risk of infection-related complications and reintervention during follow-up.

Outcomes of Endovascular Treatment for Infective Aortic Aneurysms - A Multicenter Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

In Taiwan, infective native aortic aneurysms (INAAs) are relatively common, so the aim of present study was to demonstrate the comparative outcomes of endovascular repair for thoracic and abdominal INAAs.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Patients with naïve thoracic or abdominal INAAs managed with endovascular repair between 2001 and 2018 were included in this multicenter retrospective cohort. The confounding factors were adjusted with propensity score (PS). Of the 39 thoracic and 43 abdominal INAA cases, 41 (50%) presented with aneurysmal rupture, most of which were at the infrarenal abdominal (n=35, 42.7%) or descending thoracic aorta (n=25, 30.5%). Salmonella spp. was the most frequently isolated pathogen. The overall in-hospital mortality rate was 18.3%. The risks of in-hospital death and death due to rupture were significantly lower with thoracic INAAs (12.8% vs. 23.3%; PS-adjusted odds ratio (OR) 0.24, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06-0.96; 0.1% vs. 9.3%; PS-adjusted OR 0.11, 95% CI 0.01-0.90). During a mean follow-up of 2.5 years, the risk of all-cause death was significantly higher with thoracic INAAs (35.3% vs. 15.2%; PS-adjusted HR 6.90, 95% CI 1.69-28.19). Chronic kidney disease (CKD) was associated with death.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with thoracic INAAs, endovascular repair of abdominal INAAs was associated with a significantly higher in-hospital mortality rate. However, long-term outcomes were worse for thoracic INAAs, with CKD and infections being the most important predictor and cause of death, respectively.

Editor's Choice -- European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) 2024 Clinical Practice Guidelines on the Management of Abdominal Aorto-Iliac Artery Aneurysms

OBJECTIVE

The European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) has developed clinical practice guidelines for the care of patients with aneurysms of the abdominal aorta and iliac arteries in succession to the 2011 and 2019 versions, with the aim of assisting physicians and patients in selecting the best management strategy.

METHODS

The guideline is based on scientific evidence completed with expert opinion on the matter. By summarising and evaluating the best available evidence, recommendations for the evaluation and treatment of patients have been formulated. The recommendations are graded according to a modified European Society of Cardiology grading system, where the strength (class) of each recommendation is graded from I to III and the letters A to C mark the level of evidence.

RESULTS

A total of 160 recommendations have been issued on the following topics: Service standards, including surgical volume and training; Epidemiology, diagnosis, and screening; Management of patients with small abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), including surveillance, cardiovascular risk reduction, and indication for repair; Elective AAA repair, including operative risk assessment, open and endovascular repair, and early complications; Ruptured and symptomatic AAA, including peri-operative management, such as permissive hypotension and use of aortic occlusion balloon, open and endovascular repair, and early complications, such as abdominal compartment syndrome and colonic ischaemia; Long term outcome and follow up after AAA repair, including graft infection, endoleaks and follow up routines; Management of complex AAA, including open and endovascular repair; Management of iliac artery aneurysm, including indication for repair and open and endovascular repair; and Miscellaneous aortic problems, including mycotic, inflammatory, and saccular aortic aneurysm. In addition, Shared decision making is being addressed, with supporting information for patients, and Unresolved issues are discussed.

CONCLUSION

The ESVS Clinical Practice Guidelines provide the most comprehensive, up to date, and unbiased advice to clinicians and patients on the management of abdominal aorto-iliac artery aneurysms.

Outcomes Following in Situ Reconstruction for Aortic Infection with the Neo-Aortoiliac System and Aortic Homograft

BACKGROUND

In situ reconstruction is one of the primary surgical options for primary aortic and graft and endograft infections. One institution's outcomes following aortic reconstruction with femoro-popliteal vein (i.e., the neo-aortoiliac system) and cryopreserved aortic allografts are described.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed of any patient who underwent aortic reconstruction with femoropopliteal vein or cryopreserved aortic allograft from 2013-2022 at a single tertiary-care institution.

RESULTS

Twenty four patients underwent in situ reconstruction with the neo-aortoiliac system or with cadaveric allograft for primary or secondary aortic infection from 2013-2022. Short-term (30-day) mortality remains low (3/24 or 12.5%) despite the high incidence of major postoperative complications that necessitated reintervention in 11/24 or 45.8% of the cohort, most often for recurrent intracavitary infection. Gram-negative and drug-resistant pathogens were the most commonly implicated organisms in recurrent intra-abdominal infection. Management of early allograft degeneration is also described with extra-anatomic bypass grafting, conduit/graft embolization, which is then followed by allograft explantation and wide surgical debridement. Despite low short-term (30-day) mortality, all-cause 1-year mortality remains elevated at 38.1% (8/21) in those with an adequate follow-up interval.

CONCLUSIONS

In situ reconstruction for primary or secondary aortic infections results in excellent short-term patient outcomes but is characterized by a high incidence of reintervention and an elevated all-cause 1-year mortality.

Retrospective Multicenter Study Comparing Infectious and Noninfectious Aortitis

BACKGROUND

Determining the etiology of aortitis is often challenging, in particular to distinguish infectious aortitis (IA) and noninfectious aortitis (NIA). This study aims to describe and compare the clinical, biological, and radiological characteristics of IA and NIA and their outcomes.

METHODS

A multicenter retrospective study was performed in 10 French centers, including patients with aortitis between 1 January 2014 and 31 December 2019.

RESULTS

One hundred eighty-three patients were included. Of these, 66 had IA (36.1%); the causative organism was Enterobacterales and streptococci in 18.2% each, Staphylococcus aureus in 13.6%, and Coxiella burnetii in 10.6%. NIA was diagnosed in 117 patients (63.9%), mainly due to vasculitides (49.6%), followed by idiopathic aortitis (39.3%). IA was more frequently associated with aortic aneurysms compared with NIA (78.8% vs 17.6%, P < .001), especially located in the abdominal aorta (69.7% vs 23.1%, P < .001). Crude and adjusted survival were significantly lower in IA compared to NIA (P < .001 and P = .006, respectively). In the IA cohort, high American Society of Anesthesiologists score (hazard ratio [HR], 2.47 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.08-5.66]; P = .033) and free aneurysm rupture (HR, 9.54 [95% CI, 1.04-87.11]; P = .046) were significantly associated with mortality after adjusting for age, sex, and Charlson comorbidity score. Effective empiric antimicrobial therapy, initiated before any microbial documentation, was associated with a decreased mortality (HR, 0.23, 95% CI, .08-.71]; P = .01).

CONCLUSIONS

IA was complicated by significantly higher mortality rates compared with NIA. An appropriate initial antibiotic therapy appeared as a protective factor in IA.

Mycotic Thoracic Aortic Aneurysm: Epidemiology, Pathophysiology, Diagnosis, and Management

Mycotic thoracic aortic aneurysm (MTAA) is an aneurysm of the aorta caused by infection of the vessel tissue through microbial inoculation of the diseased aortic endothelium. It is most commonly caused by bacteria. Rarely, it can be caused by fungi. However, viral aortic aneurysm has never been reported. Depending on the area and time period investigated, the infections organism discovered may vary significantly. Little is known about the natural history of MTAA due to its rarity. It is not known if they follow the same pattern as other TAAs. However, it is unclear whether MTAA follows a similar clinical course. The combination of clinical presentation, laboratory results, and radiographic results are used to make the diagnosis of MTAA. Treatment of MTAA is complex since patients frequently present at a late stage, frequently with fulminant sepsis, as well as concomitant complications such as aneurysm rupture. While medical treatment, including antibiotics, is recommended, surgery is still the mainstay of management. Surgery to treat MTAA is complicated and carries a high risk of morbidity and mortality and includes both open repairs and endovascular ones. In this review, we explore the etiology, pathogenesis, clinical presentations, diagnostic modalities as well as treatment management available for MTAA.