比较治疗主动脉移植感染的不同手术方法。

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q3 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeon Pub Date : 2024-02-12 DOI:10.1055/a-2266-7574
Yu Xia, Lizhong Sun, Kaitao Jian, Hao Peng, Yi Lin, Wei Liu
{"title":"比较治疗主动脉移植感染的不同手术方法。","authors":"Yu Xia, Lizhong Sun, Kaitao Jian, Hao Peng, Yi Lin, Wei Liu","doi":"10.1055/a-2266-7574","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is still no guideline or consensus on the treatment of aortic graft infection. This study reported and compared conservative and surgical treatment and different surgical methods for aortic graft infection.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data from aortic graft infections treated at our institution between February 2017 and June 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. Clinical data and surgical approaches were evaluated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This article retrospectively analyzed the treatment and prognosis of 48 patients (43 males) with aortic graft infection. The patients were divided into conservative treatment group (n = 15) and surgical treatment group (n = 33). During follow-up, the mortality rate of the conservative treatment group was significantly higher than that of the surgical treatment group (P<0.05). The survival curve also showed that the survival time of the surgical treatment group was longer than that of the conservative treatment group (P<0.05). The surgical treatment group included local treatment (n=5), in situ replacement (n=8) and bypass surgery (n=20) groups. There was no significant difference in the mortality rate at 1 month or final follow-up among the local treatment, in situ replacement and bypass surgery groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Surgical treatment is the optimal option for treating aortic graft infections compared to conservative treatment.</p>","PeriodicalId":23057,"journal":{"name":"Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeon","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of different surgical approaches for treating aortic graft infections.\",\"authors\":\"Yu Xia, Lizhong Sun, Kaitao Jian, Hao Peng, Yi Lin, Wei Liu\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/a-2266-7574\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is still no guideline or consensus on the treatment of aortic graft infection. This study reported and compared conservative and surgical treatment and different surgical methods for aortic graft infection.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data from aortic graft infections treated at our institution between February 2017 and June 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. Clinical data and surgical approaches were evaluated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This article retrospectively analyzed the treatment and prognosis of 48 patients (43 males) with aortic graft infection. The patients were divided into conservative treatment group (n = 15) and surgical treatment group (n = 33). During follow-up, the mortality rate of the conservative treatment group was significantly higher than that of the surgical treatment group (P<0.05). The survival curve also showed that the survival time of the surgical treatment group was longer than that of the conservative treatment group (P<0.05). The surgical treatment group included local treatment (n=5), in situ replacement (n=8) and bypass surgery (n=20) groups. There was no significant difference in the mortality rate at 1 month or final follow-up among the local treatment, in situ replacement and bypass surgery groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Surgical treatment is the optimal option for treating aortic graft infections compared to conservative treatment.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23057,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeon\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeon\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2266-7574\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeon","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2266-7574","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:关于主动脉移植物感染的治疗,目前还没有指南或共识。本研究报告并比较了主动脉移植物感染的保守治疗和手术治疗以及不同的手术方法:回顾性分析2017年2月至2022年6月期间我院治疗的主动脉移植感染数据。对临床数据和手术方法进行了评估:本文回顾性分析了48例主动脉移植感染患者(43例男性)的治疗和预后。患者分为保守治疗组(15 人)和手术治疗组(33 人)。在随访期间,保守治疗组的死亡率明显高于手术治疗组(结论:手术治疗是治疗主动脉移植感染的最佳方法:与保守治疗相比,手术治疗是治疗主动脉移植感染的最佳选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparison of different surgical approaches for treating aortic graft infections.

Background: There is still no guideline or consensus on the treatment of aortic graft infection. This study reported and compared conservative and surgical treatment and different surgical methods for aortic graft infection.

Methods: Data from aortic graft infections treated at our institution between February 2017 and June 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. Clinical data and surgical approaches were evaluated.

Results: This article retrospectively analyzed the treatment and prognosis of 48 patients (43 males) with aortic graft infection. The patients were divided into conservative treatment group (n = 15) and surgical treatment group (n = 33). During follow-up, the mortality rate of the conservative treatment group was significantly higher than that of the surgical treatment group (P<0.05). The survival curve also showed that the survival time of the surgical treatment group was longer than that of the conservative treatment group (P<0.05). The surgical treatment group included local treatment (n=5), in situ replacement (n=8) and bypass surgery (n=20) groups. There was no significant difference in the mortality rate at 1 month or final follow-up among the local treatment, in situ replacement and bypass surgery groups.

Conclusion: Surgical treatment is the optimal option for treating aortic graft infections compared to conservative treatment.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
6.70%
发文量
365
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeon publishes articles of the highest standard from internationally recognized thoracic and cardiovascular surgeons, cardiologists, anesthesiologists, physiologists, and pathologists. This journal is an essential resource for anyone working in this field. Original articles, short communications, reviews and important meeting announcements keep you abreast of key clinical advances, as well as providing the theoretical background of cardiovascular and thoracic surgery. Case reports are published in our Open Access companion journal The Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeon Reports.
期刊最新文献
HTK solution cardioplegia in paediatric patients: a meta-analysis. Intraoperative Invasive Coronary Angiography after Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting. Distal Events Following Emergent Operation for DeBakey Type I Aortic Dissection. Lactate Dehydrogenase Levels after aortic valve replacement: What do they tell us? Impact of High-Intensity Statin on Atrial Fibrillation After Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1