[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 54.205.19.31. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Article
April 1983

Arterial Graft InfectionsDelayed v Immediate Vascular Reconstruction

Author Affiliations

From the Center for Health Sciences, University of Wisconsin Hospital and Clinics, Madison.

Arch Surg. 1983;118(4):410-414. doi:10.1001/archsurg.1983.01390040022005
Abstract

• We evaluated the treatment and clinical outcome of 20 patients with major abdominal vascular graft infections and found that immediate reconstruction of arterial inflow to the lower extremities after complete removal of contaminated graft material may not always be necessary or advisable. Patients were treated by the following categories: group 1, graft removal with immediate vascular reconstruction (seven patients, two aortolliac and five aortofemoral grafts); group 2, graft removal with delayed vascular reconstruction (13 patients, three aortoiliac, five aortofemoral, and five extra-abdominal grafts). The mortality (57%) and the incidence of major amputation (14%) were highest when immediate vascular reconstruction was attempted. Patient survival, the incidence of recurrent graft infection, and the need for major amputation were favorably altered with delayed reconstruction even when prosthetic material was used.

(Arch Surg 1983;118:410-414)

×