RESUMEN

Introducción: La infección de endoprótesis de aorta abdominal (EVAR) es una entidad infrecuente, pero con una elevada mortalidad. Son escasas las publicaciones al respecto en nuestro país y no hay un consenso definitivo acerca de su manejo. Se acepta como gold standard la cirugía de explante, planteándose como alternativas la antibioterapia asociada a drenaje o limpieza del saco. Métodos: Revisión retrospectiva descriptiva de las endoprótesis aórticas tipo EVAR infectadas en nuestro centro terciario (Hospital Universitario de Cruces) en la última década (2010-2019). Resultados: Describimos las características clínicas y microbiológicas de 10 infecciones de EVAR, así como su manejo y resultados obtenidos. La incidencia de infección de EVAR fue del 3%. El tiempo medio hasta la presentación clínica de la infección fue de 16,9 meses (mediana de 4,5 meses). Se logró el diagnóstico microbiológico en el 100% de los casos (predominio de cocos grampositivos). La mortalidad global fue del 50% (sin embargo, la supervivencia fue del 100% tras limpieza quirúrgica del saco). Conclusiones: El cultivo de muestras de colecciones periprotésicas y saco aneurismático muestra una gran rentabilidad, llegando al diagnóstico microbiológico en todos los casos, a pesar de ser negativos los hemocultivos en un 50%. Destacan los buenos resultados obtenidos con la limpieza quirúrgica y preservación del dispositivo, asociada a antibioterapia. Sin embargo, en nuestra serie de casos se aprecia una importante heterogeneidad, lo que dificulta elaborar recomendaciones de manejo y obliga a individualizar el tratamiento.(AU)

Introduction: Aortic endograft infection is an infrequent but life-threatening complication after endovascular abdominal aortic repair (EVAR). There is no consensus on management of endograft infection and little evidence has been published in our country. Endograft explantation is considered the “gold standard” treatment whereas percutaneous or surgical perigraft and sac drainage associated to antibiotics should be considered and alternative therapy. Methods: We carried out a retrospective and descriptive review of abdominal aortic endograft infections at our tertiary center (Hospital Universitario Cruces) during last ten years (2010–2019). Results: We describe the clinical and microbiological characteristics of 10 EVAR infections, their management and outcomes. The incidence of graft infection after EVAR was 3%. The mean time to the clinical presentation of infection was 16.9 months (median 4.5 months). The microbiological diagnosis was reached in 100% of cases (predominance of gram-positive species). The overall mortality rate was 50% (although the survival rate was 100% after surgical drainage of the sac). Conclusions: Perigraft or aneurysm sac aspiration culture shows their diagnostic utility as microbiological diagnosis was reached in all cases despite of blood cultures being only positive in 50% of the samples. Surgical drainage and endograft preservation combined with antibiotherapy show remarkable results. The high heterogeneity in our case series makes difficult to offer general recommendations, thus far, a tailored approach to treatment is suggested.(AU)

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Aortic endograft infection is an infrequent but life-threatening complication after endovascular abdominal aortic repair (EVAR). There is no consensus on management of endograft infection and little evidence has been published in our country. Endograft explantation is considered the "gold standar" treatment whereas percutaneous or surgical perigraft and sac drainage associated to antibiotics should be considered and alternative therapy. METHODS: We carried out a retrospective and descriptive review of abdominal aortic endograft infections at our tertiary center (Hospital Universitario Cruces) during last ten years (2010-2019). RESULTS: We describe the clinical and microbiological characteristics of 10 EVAR infections, their management and outcomes. The incidence of graft infection after EVAR was 3%. The mean time to the clinical presentation of infection was 16.9 months (median 4.5 months). The microbiological diagnosis was reached in 100% of cases (predominance of gram-positive species). The overall mortality rate was 50% (although the survival rate was 100% after surgical drainage of the sac). CONCLUSION: Perigraft or aneurysm sac aspiration culture show their diagnostic utility as microbiological diagnosis was reached in all cases despite of blood cultures being only positive in 50% of the samples. Surgical drainage and endograft preservation combined with antibiotherapy show remarkable results. The high heterogeneity in our case series makes difficult to offer general recommendations, thus far, a tailored approach to treatment is suggested.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Aortic endograft infection is an infrequent but life-threatening complication after endovascular abdominal aortic repair (EVAR). There is no consensus on management of endograft infection and little evidence has been published in our country. Endograft explantation is considered the "gold standard" treatment whereas percutaneous or surgical perigraft and sac drainage associated to antibiotics should be considered and alternative therapy. METHODS: We carried out a retrospective and descriptive review of abdominal aortic endograft infections at our tertiary center (Hospital Universitario Cruces) during last ten years (2010-2019). RESULTS: We describe the clinical and microbiological characteristics of 10 EVAR infections, their management and outcomes. The incidence of graft infection after EVAR was 3%. The mean time to the clinical presentation of infection was 16.9 months (median 4.5 months). The microbiological diagnosis was reached in 100% of cases (predominance of gram-positive species). The overall mortality rate was 50% (although the survival rate was 100% after surgical drainage of the sac). CONCLUSIONS: Perigraft or aneurysm sac aspiration culture shows their diagnostic utility as microbiological diagnosis was reached in all cases despite of blood cultures being only positive in 50% of the samples. Surgical drainage and endograft preservation combined with antibiotherapy show remarkable results. The high heterogeneity in our case series makes difficult to offer general recommendations, thus far, a tailored approach to treatment is suggested.

RESUMEN

A case of a femoropopliteal recanalization procedure using a new bailout technical maneuver to aid reentry into the true lumen is described. After a failed standard reentry attempt, at the level of the vessel reconstitution in the subintimal space, the guidewire was exchanged for a GooseNeck Snare Kit. A needle was inserted across the target artery, piercing both arterial walls and passing through the snare loop. Once the needle had exited the artery, a wire was inserted and the needle withdrawn. The snare was closed, withdrawn, and the wire externalized through the femoral access. Finally, a catheter was advanced from the antegrade sheath up to the arterial reconstitution. Selective injection at the site of reentry confirmed the intraluminal position, and the procedure was successfully completed from the antegrade sheath.

Asunto(s)