Severe wound infection by MRCNS following bilateral inguinal herniorrhaphy.

BACKGROUND: Wound infection after inguinal hernia surgery is not uncommon in the clinical setting. The common microbial aetiology of postoperative inguinal hernia wound infection is Gram-positive bacteria. Staphylococcus aureus is a common pathogen causing wound infection while Staphylococcus epidermidis and Pseudomonas are rare. Staphylococcus epidermidis as a cause of severe wound infection is rarely described in literature. We herein present a case of a 79-year-old man with a rare wound infection after bilateral inguinal herniorrhaphy caused by MRCNS (Methicillin Resistant Coagulase Negative Staphylococcus). CASE PRESENTATION: We present a case of wound infection accompanied by fever with a temperature of 38.8 °C after bilateral inguinal herniorrhaphy in a 79-year-old man. Bilateral inguinal wounds were marked by redness and swelling, with skin necrosis. In addition, an abscess of approximately 1.5 cm × 1.5 cm was seen on the left wrist. A small amount of gas under the skin in the wound area was observed after pelvic computed tomography (CT) scans. No bacteria were cultured from the inguinal wound discharge, while blood culture detected MRCNS, and Acinetobacter lwoffi was cultured from the pus in the left wrist. We chose appropriate antibiotics based on the results of the bacterial culture and the drug susceptibility results. Vacuum assisted closure (VAC) therapy was used after debridement. The patient was discharged after the wounds improved. He was followed up for ten months and showed no signs of complications. We are sharing our experience along with literature review. CONCLUSIONS: We are presenting a rare case of MRCNS wound infection following open inguinal hernia surgery. Although a rarity, clinicians performing inguinal hernia surgery must consider this entity in an infected wound and follow up the patient for complications of MRCNS.

Comparative outcomes of catheter-directed thrombolysis versus AngioJet pharmacomechanical catheter-directed thrombolysis for treatment of acute iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare the outcomes of pharmacomechanical thrombolysis and thrombectomy (PCDT) plus catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) vs CDT alone for the treatment of acute iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and summarize the clinical experience, safety outcomes, and short- and long-term efficacy. METHODS: We performed a 4-year retrospective, case-control study. A total of 95 consecutive patients with acute symptomatic iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis (DVT) with a symptom duration of ≤7 days involving the iliac and/or common femoral veins underwent endovascular interventions. The patients were divided into two groups according to their clinical indications: PCDT plus CDT vs CDT alone. Statistical analyses were used to compare the clinical characteristics and outcomes between the two groups. Additionally, the patients were followed up for 3 to 36 months after treatment, and the proportions of post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS) and moderate to severe PTS were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier survival method. RESULTS: A total of 95 consecutive patients were analyzed in this retrospective study, of whom, 51 underwent CDT alone and 44 underwent PCDT plus CDT. Between the two groups, in terms of immediate-term efficacy and safety, significant differences were found in the catheter retention time (60.64 ± 12.04 hours vs 19.42 ± 4.04 hours; P < .001), dosages of urokinase required (5.82 ± 0.81 million units vs 1.80 ± 0.64 million units; P < .001), the detumescence rate at 24 hours postoperatively (48.46% ± 8.62% vs 76.79% ± 7.98%; P = .026), the descent velocity of D-dimer per day (2266.28 ± 1358.26 µg/L/D vs 3842.34 ± 2048.02 µg/L/D; P = .018), total hospitalization stay (6.2 ± 1.40 days vs 3.8 ± 0.70 days; P = .024), number of postoperative angiograms (2.4 ± 0.80 vs 1.2 ± 0.30; P = .042), and grade III venous patency (>95% lysis: 54.5% vs 68.6%; P = .047). Furthermore, during the follow-up period, significant differences were found in the incidence of PTS (Villalta scale ≥5 or a venous ulcer: 47.0% vs 27.7%; P = .037), and the incidence proportion of moderate to severe PTS at 12 months (15.7% vs 4.5%; P = .024) and 24 months (35.3% vs 11.4%; P = .016). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with CDT alone, in the iliofemoral DVT subgroup with a symptom duration of ≤7 days, PCDT plus CDT could significantly relieve early leg symptoms, shorten the hospitalization stay, reduce bleeding complications, promote long-term venous patency, and decrease the occurrence of PTS and the incidence proportion of moderate to severe PTS. Thus, the short- and long-term outcomes both support the superiority of PCDT plus CDT vs CDT in this subgroup.