Abdullah ERDOĞAN, İrfan ESER, Necdet ÖZ, Alpay SARPER, Levent DERTSİZ, Abid DEMİRCAN

Prostetik vasküler greft enfeksiyonu, 22 olgunun analizi

Amaç: Vasküler cerrahinin ciddi komplikasyonlarından biri olan greft enfeksiyonunun (GE) greft cinsi,uygulama yeri, etken ve sosyokültürel yapı ile olan ilişkisini araştırmak Metod:Akdeniz Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Göğüs Kalp Damar Cerrahisi Kliniği`nde 1990-1999 yılları arasında değişik patolojiler nedeniyle prostetik vasküler greft uygulanan hastalarda greft enfeksiyonları retrospektif olarak araştırıldı. Sonuç: Toplam 285 hastaya prostetik vasküler greft uygulandı. 134(%47) hastaya Dacron, 151(%53) hastaya PTFE greft uygulandı. Bunlardan 22` sinde(%7,7) greft enfeksiyonu tesbit edildi.Yaş ortalaması 62.3 (25-74 yaş) idi.Greft enfeksiyonu olgularının bir tanesi bayan diğerlerinin tümü erkek olup enfekte greftlerden 11'i(%50) Dacron, 11'i (%50) PTFE idi.Beş hasta (%22) Tip 2 diabetliydi. GE olan hastaların 3'üne anevrizma, birine travma diğer 18`ine ise ateroskleroz nedeniyle prostetik greft konmuştu. Enfekte greftlerden 12'si (%54,5) aortobifemoral, biri (%4) aortofemoral, 3`ü (%13) iliofemoral, 5`i (%22) femoropopliteal ve biride aorta-sol karotis pozisyondaydı. Hastaların tamamında enfeksiyon postoperatif geç dönemde tesbit edildi (1ay - 6yıl). Enfeksiyon 17 olguda (%77) inguinal bölgede 2 (%9) olguda ise uyluk iç yüzünde, bir (%4,5) hastada servikal bölge ve 2 (%9) hastada retroperitonda idi. GE'nun en sık etkeni 14 (%63,6) olgu ile staphilococcus Aureus`tu. Hastaların birine medikal tedavi uygulandı, 21'inde enfekte greft çıkarıldı. Dört (%18) hastaya aynı seansta extra anatomik bypass, 14 (%63,6) hastaya ikinci seansta greft kondu.4 (%18) hastaya extremite ampütasyonu uygulandı. Üç (%13,6) hasta GE nedeniyle kaybedildi. İrdeleme: Tesbitlerimiz GE`nu, en sık inguinal bölgede ve en sık etkeninde staph. Aureus olduğunu göstermektedir. Enfeksiyon sıklıkla postoperatif geç dönemde ortaya çıkmış olup burada hijyen ve sosyo-kültürel yapının önemli bir faktör olduğu kanaatindeyiz.

Prosthetic vascular graft infections , analysis of 22 cases

Aim: To analyze graft infections (GI), a serious complication of vascular surgery, regarding the type of the graft, site of the graft and the causal agent. Method: The graft infections of the patients with prosthetic vascular grafts, who were hospitalized at the Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Medical Faculty of Akdeniz University between the years of 1990-1999, were analyzed retrospectively. Results: Prosthetic vascular grafting was performed in a total of 285 cases. Dacron graft was used in 134(47%) cases and PTFE graft in 151(53%) cases. Of these cases, in 22(7,7%) graft infection was determined. Mean age of the patients was 62,3 years (range 25-74). Of the patients, only one was female and the rest were male. Half of the infected grafts were Dacron, and the other half were PTFE. Five(22%) of those patients had diabetes mellitus. Grafting was performed because of aneurysm(3 patients), trauma(1 patient), Takayasu arteritis(1 patient) and atherosclerosis (18 patients). The localization of the infected grafts was as follows: aortobifemoral (12 grafts) (54,5%), aortofemoral (1 graft) (4%), iliofemoral (3 grafts) (13%), femoropopliteal (5 grafts)(22%) and aortocarotid (1 graft)(4%) regions. In all patients the infection was seen at late postoperative period (1 month-6 years). The site of the infection was inguinal region in 17(77%) patients, femoropopliteal region in 2(9%) patients, cervical region in one(4%) patient and retroperitoneal region in 2(8%) patients. The most frequent causal agent for the graft infection was staphylococcus aureus. Medical treatment was commenced in one patient. The infected graft was removed surgically in 21 patients, and an extraanatomic bypass was performed in4(18%) patients in the same operation. A second grafting was performed in 14(63,6%) patients at a later operation; an extremity amputation was carried out in 4(%18) patients and 3(13,6%) patients died from graft infection. Conclusion: In our series the most common site of graft infection was inguinal region and the most frequent causal agent was staphylococcus aureus. Infections were commonly seen at the late postoperative period. This suggests that hygienic measures are important to prevent the graft infections in these patients.

PDF

___

1.Bouhoutos J, Chavatzas D, et al.:Infected synthetic arterial grafts. Br J Surg 1974;61:108.
2.Bunt TJ: Synthetic vascular graft infections. I. Graftinfections. Surgery 1983;93: 733.
3.Conn JH, Hardy JD, et al: Infected arterial grafts: Experience in 22 cases with emphasis on unusual bacteria and tecniques. Ann Surg 1970;171:704.
4.Fry WJ, Lindeneauer SM: Infection complicating the use of plastic arterial implants. Arch Surg 1967;94:600.
5.Goldstone J. Moore WS: Infection in vascular prostheses: Clinical manifestation and surgical management. Am J Surg 1974;128:225.
6.Hoffert PW, Gensler S, Haimovici H: Infection complicating arterial grafts Arch Surg 1965;90:427.
7.Liekweg WJ Jr, Greenfield, LJ: Vascular prosthetic infections: Collected experience and results of treatment. Surgery 1977;81:335.
8.Wilson SE, Von Vagenen P, Passaro E Jr.: Arterial enfection, in Ravitch MM Steichen FM (eds): Current problems in surgery. Chicago, Year Book Medical Publishers, 1978;6-89.
9.Jamieson GG, DeWeese JA, Rob CG: Infected arterial grafts. Ann Surg 1975;181: 850.
10.Szilagy DE, Smith RF, et al.: Infection in arterialreconstruction with synthetic grafts. Ann Surg 1972;176:321.
11.Goldstone J, Effeney DJ: Prevention of arterial graftinfections in Bernhard VM, Towne JB(eds): Complications in vascular surgery, 2nd ed. New York, Grune and Stratton, 1985; 487-98.
12.Cruse PJE, Foord R: The epidemiology of wound infection.A 10 year prospective study of 62,939 wounds. SurgClin North Am 1980;60:27.
13.Rubin JR, Malone JM, Goldstone J: The role of thelymphatic system in acute arterial prosthetic graftinfections. J Vasc Surg 1985;2:92.
14.Ernst CB, Compbell C, et al:Incidence and significance of intraoperative bacterial cultures during abdominal aortic aneurysmectomy. Ann Surg 1977;185:626.
15.Macbeth GA, Rubin JR, et al: The relevance of arterial wall microbiology to the treatment of prosthetic graftinfections: Graft infection vs. Arterial infection. J Vasc Surg 1984;1:750.
16.Williams RD, Fisher FW: Aneurysm contents as a source of graft infection Arc Surg 1977;112:415.
17.Krupski WC, Mitchell RA, et al.: Appendicitis and aortafemoral graft infection. Arch Surg 1979;114:969.
18.Malone JM, Moore WS , et al: Bacteriemic infectability of vascular grafts: the influence of pseudointimal integrity and duration of graft function. Surgery 1975;78:211.
19.Moore WS, Malone JM, Keown K: Prosthetic arterial graft material. Influence on neo_ntimal healing and bacteremic infactability. Arch Surg 1980;115:1379.
20.Reilly LM, Altman H, et al.: Late results following surgical management of vascular graft infection. J Vasc Surg 1984;1:36.
21.Bandyk DF, Berni GA, et al: Aortofemoral graft infection due to staphylococcus epidermitidis. Arch 1984;119: 02.
22.Goldstone J: Infected prosthetic arterial grafts, Vascular Surgery, 3rd ed. Appleton and Lange, 1989; 564- 74.
23.Moore SW. Infected aortic grafts, Advences _n vascular Surgery, Year book medical publisher Chicago, London 1983; 327- 30.
24.Beyazid M, et al: Aortabifemoral greft oklüzyonlarýnda cerrahi tedavi Damar Cerrahisi dergisi 1992; 20- 5.
25.Sevin MB, et al: Sentetik damar grefti ve sütürmateryallrinde kompleman aktivasyonu. Damar Cerrahisi dergisi 1993; 22- 7.