Predicting Infection Related Complications After Endovascular Repair of Infective Native Aortic Aneurysms

Danish Nationwide Study on Surgical Treatment of Infective Native Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to describe surgical trends, survival, and infection related complications (IRC) in a Danish cohort of patients with infective native aortic aneurysms (INAAs).

METHODS

A retrospective nationwide cohort study including all patients in Denmark who were surgically treated for abdominal INAA between 2000 and 2020 was conducted. Patients were identified through the Danish vascular registry, Karbase, which is a database registering all patients treated with vascular surgery in Denmark. Subsequent data on clinical presentation, treatment, all cause mortality, and complications were obtained from the electronic patient charts.

RESULTS

Seventy-five patients were included in the study, of whom 60 (80%) were male, with a median age of 69 (IQR 64, 75) years. Open surgical repair (OSR) was performed in 54 (72%) patients and endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) in 21 (28%). Median follow up was 52 (IQR 32, 103) months. Open repair was consistently the most frequent treatment modality throughout the study period, but EVAR became more frequent over time. The 30 day survival of the total cohort was 97% (94 - 100%). Kaplan-Meier survival estimates for the cohort were 92% (95% CI 85 - 98%), 80% (95% CI 71 - 91%), 63% (95% CI 52 - 78%), and 48% (95% CI 35 - 66%) at one, three, five and 10 years, respectively. Patients treated by EVAR had comparable long term survival to patients treated by OSR, with a hazard ratio of 0.35 (95% CI 0.10 - 1.22), but was associated with better short term survival up to five years. The most common cause of death was sepsis. Five (9%) OSR patients had IRC compared with one (5%) EVAR patient.

CONCLUSION

In this nationwide study of patients treated for abdominal INAA, an increasing number of patients were surgically treated during the study period. Patients treated by EVAR demonstrated long term survival comparable to OSR. The incidence of post-operative IRC was low. These results should be interpreted with caution and prospective registries are needed.

Outcomes Following Different Management of Mycotic Infrarenal Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms

OBJECTIVE

The objective was to present our experience on managing mycotic infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (MIAAA) through a retrospective cohort study.

METHODS

Data of patients with MIAAA managed in our center from July 2016 to October 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. The diagnosis of MIAAA was made based on: (1) preoperative clinical signs of infection; (2) elevated serologic infection parameters; (3) para-aneurysmal infection features on enhanced computed tomography; and (4) positive blood or tissue cultures. All the patients received standard antibiotic therapy. Surgical management including endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), initial EVAR followed by open re-operation, and initial open surgical repair (OSR) were conducted according to disease seriosity, physical condition, and patient's will. Infection index and clinical outcome were evaluated during the follow-up time.

RESULTS

A total of 23 patients (21 men; averaged=66.3 years, range=49-79 years) were included, with a mean follow-up time of 19.9 months (range=1-75 months). Bacteria culture from blood or tissue specimen was positive in 15 patients (Salmonella, n=8; Escherichia coli, n=3; methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus [MSSA], n=1; Klebsiella pneumoniae, n=1; Staphylococcus epidermidis, n=1; Mycobacterium tuberculosis, n=1). Seven patients received OSR as the initial surgical intervention, whereas 14 patients chose EVAR instead. The 2 conservatively managed patients (refused surgery) died within 30 days. The 7 patients who received initial OSR survived till now. Among the 14 patients who underwent initial EVAR, infection deteriorated without exception (14/14, 100%). Three of these patients refused re-operation and died within 6 months. Eleven patients received secondary surgical intervention (10 cases of aneurysm and endograft resection, thorough debridement, subclavian to bi-femoral artery bypass, or in situ aorta reconstruction; 1 case of laparoscopic debridement) and 7 survived the follow-up time. The overall mortality rate was 39.1% (9/23). The mortality rates differed greatly following different intervention methods (merely antibiotic management, 100%; initial open operation, 0%; initial EVAR without secondary operation, 100%; initial EVAR plus secondary operation, 36.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

Open surgical repair is still the first choice for hemodynamically stable and low-risk patients. Merely EVAR is related with disastrous results, which should be reserved as a temporary alternative for patients with ruptured aneurysms, hemodynamic instability or high surgical risk, and followed by timely secondary OSR.

CLINICAL IMPACT

The management of mycotic or primary-infected aortic aneurysm is challenging; treatment remains controversial. Our center has reviewed our experience over the past 6 years and found that open surgical repair is still the first choice for hemodynamically stable and low-risk patients. Merely endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is related with disastrous results, which should be reserved as a temporary alternative for patients with ruptured aneurysms, hemodynamic instability or high surgical risk, and followed by timely secondary open surgical repair.

Infective Native Aortic Aneurysm: a Delphi Consensus Document on Treatment, Follow Up, and Definition of Cure

OBJECTIVE

Evidence is lacking to guide the management of infective native aortic aneurysm (INAA). The aim of this study was to establish expert consensus on surgical and antimicrobial treatment and follow up, and to define when an INAA is considered cured.

METHODS

Delphi methodology was used. The principal investigators invited 47 international experts (specialists in infectious diseases, radiology, nuclear medicine, and vascular and cardiothoracic surgery) via email. Four Delphi rounds were performed, three weeks each, using an online questionnaire with initially 28 statements. The panellists rated the statements on a five point Likert scale. Comments on statements were analysed, statements were revised and added or deleted, and the results were presented in the iterative rounds. Consensus was defined as ≥ 75% of the panel rating a statement as strongly agree or agree on the Likert scale, and consensus on the final assessment was defined as Cronbach's alpha > 0.80.

RESULTS

All 49 panellists completed all four rounds, resulting in 100% participation. One statement was added based on the results and comments of the panel, resulting in 29 final statements: three on need for consensus, 20 on treatment, five on follow up, and one on definition of cure. All 29 statements reached agreement of ≥ 86%. Cronbach's alpha increased for each consecutive round; round 1, 0.85; round 2, 0.90; round 3, 0.91; and round 4, 0.94. Thus, consensus was reached for all statements.

CONCLUSION

INAAs are rare, and high level evidence to guide optimal management is lacking. This consensus document was established with the aim of helping clinicians manage these challenging patients, as a supplement to current guidelines. The presented consensus will need future amendments in accordance with newly acquired knowledge.

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.