Download PDF
Gefäßmedizin Scan - Zeitschrift für Angiologie, Gefäßchirurgie, diagnostische und interventionelle Radiologie 2018; 05(03): 217-229
DOI: 10.1055/a-0669-6671
CME-Fortbildung
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Management von Stentprotheseninfektionen nach EVAR und TEVAR

Thomas Betz
,
Ingolf Töpel
,
Markus Steinbauer
,
Christian Uhl
Subject Editor: Wissenschaftlich verantwortlich gemäß Zertifizierungsbestimmungen für diesen Beitrag ist Dr. med. Thomas Betz, Regensburg.
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
25 September 2018 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Eine Stentprotheseninfektion nach endovaskulärer Aneurysmaversorgung ist eine seltene, jedoch schwere Komplikation mit hoher Mortalität. Aufgrund der steigenden Anzahl von endovaskulären Eingriffen ist mit einer Zunahme von Stentprotheseninfektionen zu rechnen. Eine einheitliche Leitlinie zu Diagnostik und Therapie dieses Krankheitsbilds existiert nicht. Im vorliegenden Artikel wird ein Überblick über die Genese und Therapie von Stentprotheseninfekten anhand der aktuellen Literatur gegeben. Zusätzlich werden die Ergebnisse der im eigenen Zentrum behandelten Patienten präsentiert.
Kernaussagen

  • Die Endograft-Infektion nach EVAR oder TEVAR ist ein komplexes Krankheitsbild, das Erfahrung im Umgang mit Prothesenmaterialien erfordert.

  • Es sind hohe Anforderungen an das perioperative Umfeld notwendig.

  • Die chirurgische Herdsanierung, der Prothesenersatz und die begleitende antibiotische Therapie sind entscheidend für das Langzeitergebnis nach Endostentinfektion.

  • Eine konservative Therapie sollte nur bei chirurgisch nicht sanierbarem Fokus oder inoperablen Patienten durchgeführt werden.

  • Die Therapie von Stentprotheseninfektionen sollte Zentren vorbehalten bleiben.

Schlüsselwörter

EVAR - TEVAR - Stentprotheseninfektion - septische Gefäßchirurgie
 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Setacci C, Chisci E, Setacci F. et al. How to diagnose and manage infected endografts after endovascular aneurysm repair. Aorta (Stanford) 2014; 2: 255-264
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Capoccia L, Speziale F, Menna D. et al. Preliminary results from a national enquiry of infection in abdominal aortic endovascular repair (Registry of Infection in EVAR–R. I.EVAR). Ann Vasc Surg 2016; 30: 198-204
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Murphy EH, Szeto WY, Herdrich BJ. The management of endograft infections following endovascular thoracic and abdominal aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg 2013; 58: 1179-1185
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Uhl C, Betz T, Töpel I. et al. Sigmoidal diverticulitis as a potential source of aortic endograft infection after endovascular repair of a ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm. Vasa 2013; 42: 310-312
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Fiorani P, Speziale F, Calisti A. et al. Endovascular graft infection: preliminary results of an international enquiry. J Endovasc Ther 2003; 10: 919-927
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Treska V, Certik B, Molacek J. Management of aortic graft infections – the present strategy and future perspectives. Bratisl Lek Listy 2016; 117: 125-132
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Moulakakis KG, Mylonas SN, Antonopoulos CN. et al. Comparison of treatment strategies for thoracic endograft infection. J Vasc Surg 2014; 60: 1061-1071
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Smeds MR, Duncan AA, Lawrence PF. et al. Treatment and outcomes of aortic endograft infection. J Vasc Surg 2016; 63: 332-340
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Herscu G, Wilson SE. Prosthetic infection: lessons from treatment of the infected vascular graft. Surg Clin North Am 2009; 89: 391-401
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Hobbs SD, Kumar S, Gilling-Smith GL. Epidemiology and diagnosis of endograft infection. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino) 2010; 51: 5-14
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Ducasse E, Calisti A, Speziale F. et al. Aortoiliac stentgraft infection: current problems and management. Ann Vasc Surg 2004; 18: 521-526
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Antoniou GA, Koutsias S, Antoniu SA. et al. Outcome after endovascular stent graft repair of aortoenteric fistula: a systematic review. J Vasc Surg 2009; 49: 782-789
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Cernohorsky P, Reijnen MM, Zielliu IF. et al. The relevance of aortic Endograft prosthetic infection. J Vasc Surg 2011; 54: 327-333
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Aho PS, Roth WD, Keto P. et al. Early elective conversion for failing EVAR. Scand J Surg 2005; 94: 221-226
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Setacci C, De Donato G, Setacci F. et al. Management of abdominal endograft infection. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino) 2010; 51: 33-41
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Orton DF, LeVeen RF, Saigh JA. et al. Aortic prosthetic graft infections: radiologic manifestations and implications for management. Radiographics 2000; 20: 977-993
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Eggebrecht H, Mehta RH, Dechene A. et al. Aortooesophageal fistula after thoracic stent-graft placement: a rare but catastrophic complication of a novel emerging technique. JACC Cardiovac Interv 2009; 2: 570-576
    Google Scholar
  • 18 Bruggink JL, Glaudemans AW, Saleem BR. et al. Accuracy of FDG-PET-CT in the diagnostic work-up of vascular prosthetic graft infection. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2010; 40: 348-354
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Tokuda Y, Oshima H, Araki Y. et al. Detection of thoracic aortic prosthetic graft infection with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2013; 43: 1183-1187
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Spacek M, Belohlavek O, Votrubova J. et al. Diagnostics of “non-acute” vascular prosthesis infection using 18F-FDG PET/CT: our experience with 96 prostheses. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2009; 36: 850-858
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Dormandy JA, Rutherford RB. TASC Working Group. Management of peripheral arterial disease (PAD). TransAtlantic Inter-Society Concensus (TASC). J Vasc Surg 2000; 31: S1-S296
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Kamphol L. Conservative treatment of endograft infections after EVAR with CT guided drainage and graft preservation: When can it work and when can it not. Oral presentation at Veith Symposium 2014. New York: 19.11.2014
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Chiesa R, Melissano G, Marone EM. et al. Aorto-oesophageal and aortobronchial fistulae following thoracic endovascular aortic repair: a national survey. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2010; 39: 273-279
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Lyons OT, Patel AS, Saha P. et al. A 14-year experience with aortic endograft infection: management and results. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2013; 46: 306-313
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Haidar GM, Hicks TD, Strosberg DS. et al. “In situ” endografting in the treatment of arterial and graft infections. J Vasc Surg 2017; 65: 1824-1829
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Usatii A, Payne W, Santilli S. Removal of an infected endograft and open aortic reconstruction: technical remarks. Ann Vasc Surg 2013; 27: 679-683
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Chaufour X, Caudric J, Goueffic Y. et al. A multicenter experience with infected abdominal aortic endograft explantation. J Vasc Surg 2017; 65: 372-380
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Berger P, Moll FL. Aortic graft infections: is there still a role for axillobifemoral reconstruction?. Semin Vasc Surg 2011; 24: 205-210
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 OʼConnor S, Andrew P, Batt M. A systematic review and metaanalysis of treatments for aortic graft infection. J Vasc Surg 2006; 44: 38-45
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Töpel I, Uhl C, Ayx I. et al. Xenogene Transplantate in der septischen Gefäßchirurgie. Gefässchirurgie 2016; 21: 164-168
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Kieffer E, Gomes D, Chiche L. et al. Allograft replacement for infrarenal aortic graft infection: early and late results in 179 patients. J Vasc Surg 2004; 39: 1009-1017
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Pupka A, Skora J, Janczak D. et al. In situ revascularisation with silver-coated polyester prostheses and arterial homografts in patients with aortic graft infection – a prospective, comparative, single-centre study. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2011; 41: 61-67
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Chung J, Clagett GP. Neoaortoiliac System (NAIS) procedure for the treatment of the infected aortic graft. Semin Vasc Surg 2011; 24: 220-226
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Neufang A, Savvidis S. Technik und Morbidität der Entnahme der V. femoralis superficialis. Gefässchirurgie 2016; 21: 151-163
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Ali AT, Modrall JG, Hocking J. et al. Long-term results of the treatment of aortic graft infection by in situ replacement with femoral popliteal vein grafts. J Vasc Surg 2009; 50: 30-39
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Wells JK, Hagino RT, Bargmann KM. et al. Venous morbidity after superficial femoral-popliteal vein harvest. J Vasc Surg 1999; 29: 282-289
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Sousa JV, Antunes L, Mendes C. et al. Prosthetic vascular graft infections: a center experience. Angiol Cir Vasc 2014; 10: 52-57
    Google Scholar
  • 38 Lew W, Moore W. Antibiotic-impregnated grafts for aortic reconstruction. Semin Vasc Surg 2011; 24: 211-219
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Oderich GS, Bower TC, Hofer J. et al. In situ rifampin-soaked grafts with omental coverage and antibiotic suppression are durable with low reinfection rates in patients with aortic graft enteric erosion or fistula. J Vasc Surg 2011; 53: 99-106
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Krasznai AG, Snoeijs M, Siroen MP. et al. Treatment of aortic graft infection by in situ reconstruction with Omniflow II biosynthetic prosthesis. Vascular 2016; 24: 561-566
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Czerny M, von Allmen R, Opfermann P. et al. Self-made pericardial tube graft: a new surgical concept for treatment of graft infections after thoracic and abdominal aortic procedures. Ann Thorac Surg 2011; 92: 1657-1662
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Töpel I, Betz T, Uhl C. et al. Use of biosynthetic prosthesis (Omniflow II®) to replace infected infrainguinal prosthetic grafts – first results. Vasa 2012; 41: 215-220
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Fellmer P, Wiltberger G, Tautenhahn HM. et al. Frühergebnisse nach peripherem Gefäßersatz mit einer biosynthetischen Kollagenprothese bei Protheseninfektionen. Zentralbl Chir 2014; 139: 546-551
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Acosta S, Björck M, Wanhainen A. Negative-pressure wound therapy for prevention and treatment of surgical-site infections after vascular surgery. Br J Surg 2017; 104: 75-84
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Mayer D, Hasse B, Enzler M. et al. Long-term results of vascular graft and artery preserving treatment with negative pressure wound therapy in Szilagyi grade III infections justify a paradigm shift. Ann Surg 2011; 254: 754-759
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Moulakakis KG, Sfyroeras GS, Mylonas SN. et al. Outcome after preservation of infected abdominal aortic endografts. J Endovasc Ther 2014; 21: 448-455
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Moulakakis KG, Sfyroreras GS, Kakisis J. et al. Endograft infection and treatment with preservation of the endograft: early results in three cases. Ann Vasc Surg 2007; 28: 1789
    Google Scholar
  • 48 Sharif MA, Lee B, Lau LL. Prosthetic stent graft infection after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg 2007; 46: 442-448
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Canaud L, Alric P, Gandet T. et al. Open surgical secondary procedures after thoracic endovascular aortic repair. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2013; 46: 667-674
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Heyer KS, Modi P, Morasch MD. et al. Secondary infections of thoracic and abdominal aortic endografts. J Vasc Interven Radiol 2009; 20: 173-179
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar