Do Surgical Site Infections in Open Aortoiliac Surgery Differ Between Occlusive and Aneurysmal Arterial Disease?

BACKGROUND: Surgical site infections (SSI) are frequently seen after aortoiliac vascular surgery (2%-14%). Deep SSIs are associated with graft infection, sepsis, and mortality. This study evaluates the difference in incidence and nature of SSI following open aortoiliac surgery for aneurysmal disease compared to occlusive arterial disease. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted, including all consecutive patients who underwent open aortoiliac vascular surgery between January 2005 and December 2016 in the Amphia Hospital, Breda, the Netherlands. Patients were grouped by disease type, either aneurysmal or occlusive arterial disease. Data were gathered, including patient characteristics, potential risk factors, and development of SSI. Surgical site infections were defined in accordance with the criteria of the Centers for Disease Control. RESULTS: Between January 2005 and December 2016, a total of 756 patients underwent open aortoiliac surgery of which 517 had aortoiliac aneurysms and 225 had aortoiliac occlusive disease. The group with occlusive disease was younger, predominantly male, and had more smokers. After exclusion of 228 patients undergoing acute surgery, the SSI rate after elective surgery was 6.2%, with 10 of 301 SSIs in the aneurysmal group (3.0%) and 22 of 213 SSIs in the group with occlusive disease (10.3%, P < .001). Also, infection-related readmission and reintervention were higher after occlusive surgery, 6.6% versus 0.9% (P < .001) and 4.2% versus 0.9% (P = .003), respectively. Staphylococcus aureus was found as the most common pathogen, causing 64% of SSI in occlusive disease versus 10% in aneurysmal disease (P = .005). Logistic regression showed occlusive arterial disease and chronic renal disease were associated with SSI. CONCLUSION: Our study presents evidence for a higher rate of SSI in patients with aortoiliac occlusive disease compared to aortoiliac aneurysmal disease, in part due to inherent use of inguinal incision in patients with occlusive disease. All precautions to prevent SSI should be taken in patients undergoing vascular surgery for arterial occlusive disease.

Quality of Life and Traditional Outcome Results at 1 Year in Elderly Patients Having Critical Limb Ischemia and the Role of Conservative Treatment.

INTRODUCTION: Revascularization is the cornerstone of the treatment of critical limb ischemia (CLI), but the number of elderly frail patients increase. Revascularization is not always possible in these patients and conservative therapy seems to be an option. The goals of this study are to analyze the 1-year quality of life (QoL) results and mortality rates of elderly patients with CLI and to investigate if conservative treatment could be an acceptable treatment option. METHODS: Patients with CLI ≥70 years old were included in a prospective observational cohort study in 2 hospitals in the Netherlands between 2012 and 2016 and were divided over 3 treatment modalities: endovascular therapy, surgical revascularization, and conservative treatment. The World Health Organization Quality of Life (WHOQoL-Bref) instrument, a generic QoL assessment tool that includes components of physical, psychological, social relationships and environment, was used to evaluate QoL at baseline, 6 months, and 1 year. RESULTS: In total, 195 patients (56% male, 33% Rutherford 4, mean age of 80) were included. Physical QoL significantly increased after surgical (10.4 vs 14.9, P < .001), endovascular (10.9 vs 13.7, P < .001), and conservative therapy (11.6 vs 13.2, P = .01) at 1 year. One-year mortality was relatively low after surgery (10%) compared to endovascular (40%) and conservative therapy (37%). CONCLUSION: The results of this study could not be used to designate the superior treatment used in elderly patients with CLI. Conservative treatment could be an acceptable treatment option in selected patients with CLI unfit for revascularization. Treatment of choice in elderly patients with CLI is based on multiple factors and should be individualized in a shared decision-making process.