↓ Skip to main content

The Results of In Situ Prosthetic Graft Replacement for Infected Aortic Disease

Overview of attention for article published in World Journal of Surgery, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 Mendeley
Title
The Results of In Situ Prosthetic Graft Replacement for Infected Aortic Disease
Published in
World Journal of Surgery, February 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00268-018-4533-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Youngjin Han, Tae‐Won Kwon, Sang Jun Park, Min‐Jae Jeong, Kyunghak Choi, Gi‐Young Ko, Sang‐Oh Lee, Yong‐Pil Cho

Abstract

Infected aortic disease is a serious clinical condition associated with significant morbidity and mortality. This study reviewed the outcomes of in situ aortic replacement with a prosthetic graft for infected aortic disease, including primary infected abdominal aortic aneurysms (PIAAA), infected aortic prosthetic grafts (IAPG), and infected aortic stent grafts (IASG). Twenty-eight consecutive patients who underwent in situ aortic replacement with a prosthetic graft for PIAAA, IAPG, and IASG at a single center from January 2001 to December 2015 were retrospectively analyzed. Demographics, clinical characteristics, medical management, surgical procedure, and clinical outcomes were included. Nineteen patients with a PIAAA, three with an IAPG following open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), and six with an IASG following endovascular aortic repair underwent in situ prosthetic graft replacement with infected tissue and graft removal. In-hospital mortality was 7.1% (2/28). One died of bleeding on postoperative day 12, and the other died of hepatic failure on postoperative day 32. Of six patients with an IASG, two had major complications that were related to barb injury at the proximal aorta. The reinfection rate was 14.3% (4 of 28) during a mean follow-up of 35.7 months (1-142 months). All new grafts of three patients with IAPG were reinfected. The other patient became reinfected after surgery for PIAAA with iatrogenic small bowel perforation that was not detected during surgery. In situ graft replacement of PIAAA and IASG is feasible with acceptable outcomes, but the outcome for IAPG is questionable.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 2 14%
Student > Master 2 14%
Researcher 2 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 7%
Other 3 21%
Unknown 3 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 64%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 7%
Psychology 1 7%
Unknown 2 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 February 2018.
All research outputs
#20,465,050
of 23,023,224 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Surgery
#3,827
of 4,262 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#375,398
of 437,326 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Surgery
#98
of 111 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,023,224 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,262 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 437,326 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 111 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.