Endograft Infection After Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To report a meta-analysis of the published evidence on the outcomes of aortic endograft infection after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). METHODS: A search of electronic information sources (PubMed/MEDLINE, SCOPUS, CENTRAL) and bibliographic reference lists identified 12 studies reporting on 362 patients (mean age 72 years; 279 men). The methodological quality of the selected studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Endpoints were 30-day/in-hospital mortality and follow-up mortality. Pooled estimates are reported with the 95% confidence interval (CI). The review was registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews in Health and Social Care (CRD42016034166). RESULTS: The incidence of graft infection after EVAR was 0.6% (95% CI 0.4% to 0.8%). The time from implantation to diagnosis ranged from 1 to 128 months (mean 25). The majority of patients (293, 81%) underwent surgical treatment (95% CI 77% to 83%); 9 (2.5%) patients (95% CI 21% to 43%) received conservative treatment. Aortic replacement with a prosthetic graft was performed in 58% (95% CI 52% to 62%), whereas cryopreserved allografts and autologous grafts were used in 31% (95% CI 28% to 33%) and 11% (95% CI% 8 to 14%), respectively. Less than half of the patients (40%) had emergency surgery. The pooled estimate of 30-day/in-hospital mortality was 26.6% (95% CI 16.9% to 39.2%). The pooled 30-day/in-hospital mortality for 9 patients treated conservatively was 63.3% (95% CI 30.7% to 87.0%). The pooled overall follow-up mortality was 45.7% (95% CI 36.4% to 55.4%) vs 58.6% (95% CI 28.8% to 83.3%) for the 9 patients receiving conservative treatment. CONCLUSION: Aortic endograft infection is a rare complication after EVAR. Surgical treatment with complete explantation of the infected endograft seems to be the optimal management in selected patients. Supportive medical treatment without surgical intervention has a significant associated mortality.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.018 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.023 | 0.048 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".