Does minimally invasive approach reduce risk of infection after ventricular assist device implantation?
Background: We analyzed patients with left ventricular assist device (LVAD) related and specific infection, and aimed to determine whether surgical technique implantation affect the frequency of infection. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the data of 99 patients who received LVAD at our departme...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | International journal of artificial organs 2021-12, Vol.44 (12), p.972-979 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 979 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 12 |
| container_start_page | 972 |
| container_title | International journal of artificial organs |
| container_volume | 44 |
| creator | Kervan, Umit Tezer, Yasemin Kocabeyoglu, Sinan Sabit Sert, Dogan Emre Karahan, Mehmet Akdi, Mustafa Yilmaz, Abdulkadir Kocak, Can Colak, Abdurahim Catav, Zeki |
| description | Background:
We analyzed patients with left ventricular assist device (LVAD) related and specific infection, and aimed to determine whether surgical technique implantation affect the frequency of infection.
Methods:
We retrospectively analyzed the data of 99 patients who received LVAD at our department between June 2013 and June 2019. Patients were divided into two groups according to the surgical technique. Group A (n = 58) was conventional sternotomy (CS) and group B (n = 41) was on-pump minimally invasive left thoracotomy (MILT). Demographics, preoperative risk factors, LVAD infections, surgical incision site, driveline site, and outcomes were compared between these two groups.
Results:
Mean follow up time was 589 ± 480 (31–2171) days. Infection was detected in 34% (41/99) of LVAD patients. Admission to emergency department and intensive care unit (ICU) in last 6 months were significantly higher in MILT group. There was no difference between the two groups in terms of driveline exit site infection (CS: 28%, MILT: 27%) (p > 0.05). Seven (17%) patients had infection in the thoracotomy incision site area in the MILT group. The rate of ICU hospitalization in the last 6 months was seen as the only independent risk factor increasing the frequency of infection (R = 0.30; p = 0.016). Survival analysis at 60 days, 1 year and 2 years showed no difference between the two groups (p = 0.09).
Conclusions:
Despite advances in pump technology and surgical technique, infection is still an important cause of mortality and morbidity. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1177/03913988211013367 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2525662278</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_03913988211013367</sage_id><sourcerecordid>2525662278</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c368t-93673e43923f957ae6894850be2f3c1a18598fcd04b0dfb83c3f855ced7a222a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kTlPAzEQhS0EIuH4ATTIEg3NBh-7PiqEuKVINFCvHO84OOwR7N1I-fc4CocEoppivvfmzQxCJ5RMKJXygnBNuVaKUUoo50LuoDGVLM8EyckuGm_62QYYoYMYF4RQkefFPhpxriWVgo3R_KaDiBvf-sbU9Rr7dmWiXwE2y2XojH3FAarBAg4-vuHOJcCB7X3XYuN6CHgFbR-8HWoTsInRxx5XsPJJ4ZtlbdrebODLI7TnTB3h-LMeope72-frh2z6dP94fTXNLBeqz3RagkPONeNOF9KAUDpXBZkBc9xSQ1WhlbMVyWekcjPFLXeqKCxU0jDGDD9E51vflP59gNiXjY8W6pQEuiGWrGCFEIxJldCzX-iiG0Kb0pVMEKE5oYQkim4pG7oYA7hyGdKtwrqkpNx8ofzzhaQ5_XQeZg1U34qvsydgsgWimcPP2P8dPwALKY-s</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2606930100</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Does minimally invasive approach reduce risk of infection after ventricular assist device implantation?</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SAGE Complete A-Z List</source><creator>Kervan, Umit ; Tezer, Yasemin ; Kocabeyoglu, Sinan Sabit ; Sert, Dogan Emre ; Karahan, Mehmet ; Akdi, Mustafa ; Yilmaz, Abdulkadir ; Kocak, Can ; Colak, Abdurahim ; Catav, Zeki</creator><creatorcontrib>Kervan, Umit ; Tezer, Yasemin ; Kocabeyoglu, Sinan Sabit ; Sert, Dogan Emre ; Karahan, Mehmet ; Akdi, Mustafa ; Yilmaz, Abdulkadir ; Kocak, Can ; Colak, Abdurahim ; Catav, Zeki</creatorcontrib><description>Background:
We analyzed patients with left ventricular assist device (LVAD) related and specific infection, and aimed to determine whether surgical technique implantation affect the frequency of infection.
Methods:
We retrospectively analyzed the data of 99 patients who received LVAD at our department between June 2013 and June 2019. Patients were divided into two groups according to the surgical technique. Group A (n = 58) was conventional sternotomy (CS) and group B (n = 41) was on-pump minimally invasive left thoracotomy (MILT). Demographics, preoperative risk factors, LVAD infections, surgical incision site, driveline site, and outcomes were compared between these two groups.
Results:
Mean follow up time was 589 ± 480 (31–2171) days. Infection was detected in 34% (41/99) of LVAD patients. Admission to emergency department and intensive care unit (ICU) in last 6 months were significantly higher in MILT group. There was no difference between the two groups in terms of driveline exit site infection (CS: 28%, MILT: 27%) (p > 0.05). Seven (17%) patients had infection in the thoracotomy incision site area in the MILT group. The rate of ICU hospitalization in the last 6 months was seen as the only independent risk factor increasing the frequency of infection (R = 0.30; p = 0.016). Survival analysis at 60 days, 1 year and 2 years showed no difference between the two groups (p = 0.09).
Conclusions:
Despite advances in pump technology and surgical technique, infection is still an important cause of mortality and morbidity.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0391-3988</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1724-6040</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/03913988211013367</identifier><identifier>PMID: 33971762</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London, England: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Demography ; Emergency medical care ; Emergency medical services ; Health risks ; Heart ; Heart Failure - surgery ; Heart-Assist Devices ; Humans ; Implantation ; Infections ; Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures ; Morbidity ; Ostomy ; Prosthesis-Related Infections - epidemiology ; Prosthesis-Related Infections - prevention & control ; Retrospective Studies ; Risk analysis ; Risk factors ; Risk management ; Sternotomy - adverse effects ; Surgical techniques ; Survival analysis ; Thoracotomy - adverse effects ; Ventricle</subject><ispartof>International journal of artificial organs, 2021-12, Vol.44 (12), p.972-979</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2021</rights><rights>Copyright Wichtig Editore s.r.l. Dec 2021</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c368t-93673e43923f957ae6894850be2f3c1a18598fcd04b0dfb83c3f855ced7a222a3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c368t-93673e43923f957ae6894850be2f3c1a18598fcd04b0dfb83c3f855ced7a222a3</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-7198-069X ; 0000-0003-1705-4999</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/03913988211013367$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/03913988211013367$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,21800,27905,27906,43602,43603</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33971762$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kervan, Umit</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tezer, Yasemin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kocabeyoglu, Sinan Sabit</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sert, Dogan Emre</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Karahan, Mehmet</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Akdi, Mustafa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yilmaz, Abdulkadir</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kocak, Can</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Colak, Abdurahim</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Catav, Zeki</creatorcontrib><title>Does minimally invasive approach reduce risk of infection after ventricular assist device implantation?</title><title>International journal of artificial organs</title><addtitle>Int J Artif Organs</addtitle><description>Background:
We analyzed patients with left ventricular assist device (LVAD) related and specific infection, and aimed to determine whether surgical technique implantation affect the frequency of infection.
Methods:
We retrospectively analyzed the data of 99 patients who received LVAD at our department between June 2013 and June 2019. Patients were divided into two groups according to the surgical technique. Group A (n = 58) was conventional sternotomy (CS) and group B (n = 41) was on-pump minimally invasive left thoracotomy (MILT). Demographics, preoperative risk factors, LVAD infections, surgical incision site, driveline site, and outcomes were compared between these two groups.
Results:
Mean follow up time was 589 ± 480 (31–2171) days. Infection was detected in 34% (41/99) of LVAD patients. Admission to emergency department and intensive care unit (ICU) in last 6 months were significantly higher in MILT group. There was no difference between the two groups in terms of driveline exit site infection (CS: 28%, MILT: 27%) (p > 0.05). Seven (17%) patients had infection in the thoracotomy incision site area in the MILT group. The rate of ICU hospitalization in the last 6 months was seen as the only independent risk factor increasing the frequency of infection (R = 0.30; p = 0.016). Survival analysis at 60 days, 1 year and 2 years showed no difference between the two groups (p = 0.09).
Conclusions:
Despite advances in pump technology and surgical technique, infection is still an important cause of mortality and morbidity.</description><subject>Demography</subject><subject>Emergency medical care</subject><subject>Emergency medical services</subject><subject>Health risks</subject><subject>Heart</subject><subject>Heart Failure - surgery</subject><subject>Heart-Assist Devices</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Implantation</subject><subject>Infections</subject><subject>Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures</subject><subject>Morbidity</subject><subject>Ostomy</subject><subject>Prosthesis-Related Infections - epidemiology</subject><subject>Prosthesis-Related Infections - prevention & control</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Risk analysis</subject><subject>Risk factors</subject><subject>Risk management</subject><subject>Sternotomy - adverse effects</subject><subject>Surgical techniques</subject><subject>Survival analysis</subject><subject>Thoracotomy - adverse effects</subject><subject>Ventricle</subject><issn>0391-3988</issn><issn>1724-6040</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kTlPAzEQhS0EIuH4ATTIEg3NBh-7PiqEuKVINFCvHO84OOwR7N1I-fc4CocEoppivvfmzQxCJ5RMKJXygnBNuVaKUUoo50LuoDGVLM8EyckuGm_62QYYoYMYF4RQkefFPhpxriWVgo3R_KaDiBvf-sbU9Rr7dmWiXwE2y2XojH3FAarBAg4-vuHOJcCB7X3XYuN6CHgFbR-8HWoTsInRxx5XsPJJ4ZtlbdrebODLI7TnTB3h-LMeope72-frh2z6dP94fTXNLBeqz3RagkPONeNOF9KAUDpXBZkBc9xSQ1WhlbMVyWekcjPFLXeqKCxU0jDGDD9E51vflP59gNiXjY8W6pQEuiGWrGCFEIxJldCzX-iiG0Kb0pVMEKE5oYQkim4pG7oYA7hyGdKtwrqkpNx8ofzzhaQ5_XQeZg1U34qvsydgsgWimcPP2P8dPwALKY-s</recordid><startdate>202112</startdate><enddate>202112</enddate><creator>Kervan, Umit</creator><creator>Tezer, Yasemin</creator><creator>Kocabeyoglu, Sinan Sabit</creator><creator>Sert, Dogan Emre</creator><creator>Karahan, Mehmet</creator><creator>Akdi, Mustafa</creator><creator>Yilmaz, Abdulkadir</creator><creator>Kocak, Can</creator><creator>Colak, Abdurahim</creator><creator>Catav, Zeki</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>Wichtig Editore s.r.l</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QF</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7QQ</scope><scope>7SC</scope><scope>7SE</scope><scope>7SP</scope><scope>7SR</scope><scope>7TA</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>7U5</scope><scope>8BQ</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>F28</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H8D</scope><scope>H8G</scope><scope>JG9</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>L~C</scope><scope>L~D</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7198-069X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1705-4999</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202112</creationdate><title>Does minimally invasive approach reduce risk of infection after ventricular assist device implantation?</title><author>Kervan, Umit ; Tezer, Yasemin ; Kocabeyoglu, Sinan Sabit ; Sert, Dogan Emre ; Karahan, Mehmet ; Akdi, Mustafa ; Yilmaz, Abdulkadir ; Kocak, Can ; Colak, Abdurahim ; Catav, Zeki</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c368t-93673e43923f957ae6894850be2f3c1a18598fcd04b0dfb83c3f855ced7a222a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Demography</topic><topic>Emergency medical care</topic><topic>Emergency medical services</topic><topic>Health risks</topic><topic>Heart</topic><topic>Heart Failure - surgery</topic><topic>Heart-Assist Devices</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Implantation</topic><topic>Infections</topic><topic>Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures</topic><topic>Morbidity</topic><topic>Ostomy</topic><topic>Prosthesis-Related Infections - epidemiology</topic><topic>Prosthesis-Related Infections - prevention & control</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Risk analysis</topic><topic>Risk factors</topic><topic>Risk management</topic><topic>Sternotomy - adverse effects</topic><topic>Surgical techniques</topic><topic>Survival analysis</topic><topic>Thoracotomy - adverse effects</topic><topic>Ventricle</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kervan, Umit</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tezer, Yasemin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kocabeyoglu, Sinan Sabit</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sert, Dogan Emre</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Karahan, Mehmet</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Akdi, Mustafa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yilmaz, Abdulkadir</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kocak, Can</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Colak, Abdurahim</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Catav, Zeki</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Aluminium Industry Abstracts</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Ceramic Abstracts</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts</collection><collection>Corrosion Abstracts</collection><collection>Electronics & Communications Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineered Materials Abstracts</collection><collection>Materials Business File</collection><collection>Mechanical & Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Solid State and Superconductivity Abstracts</collection><collection>METADEX</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ANTE: Abstracts in New Technology & Engineering</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Aerospace Database</collection><collection>Copper Technical Reference Library</collection><collection>Materials Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Academic</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Professional</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>International journal of artificial organs</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kervan, Umit</au><au>Tezer, Yasemin</au><au>Kocabeyoglu, Sinan Sabit</au><au>Sert, Dogan Emre</au><au>Karahan, Mehmet</au><au>Akdi, Mustafa</au><au>Yilmaz, Abdulkadir</au><au>Kocak, Can</au><au>Colak, Abdurahim</au><au>Catav, Zeki</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Does minimally invasive approach reduce risk of infection after ventricular assist device implantation?</atitle><jtitle>International journal of artificial organs</jtitle><addtitle>Int J Artif Organs</addtitle><date>2021-12</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>44</volume><issue>12</issue><spage>972</spage><epage>979</epage><pages>972-979</pages><issn>0391-3988</issn><eissn>1724-6040</eissn><abstract>Background:
We analyzed patients with left ventricular assist device (LVAD) related and specific infection, and aimed to determine whether surgical technique implantation affect the frequency of infection.
Methods:
We retrospectively analyzed the data of 99 patients who received LVAD at our department between June 2013 and June 2019. Patients were divided into two groups according to the surgical technique. Group A (n = 58) was conventional sternotomy (CS) and group B (n = 41) was on-pump minimally invasive left thoracotomy (MILT). Demographics, preoperative risk factors, LVAD infections, surgical incision site, driveline site, and outcomes were compared between these two groups.
Results:
Mean follow up time was 589 ± 480 (31–2171) days. Infection was detected in 34% (41/99) of LVAD patients. Admission to emergency department and intensive care unit (ICU) in last 6 months were significantly higher in MILT group. There was no difference between the two groups in terms of driveline exit site infection (CS: 28%, MILT: 27%) (p > 0.05). Seven (17%) patients had infection in the thoracotomy incision site area in the MILT group. The rate of ICU hospitalization in the last 6 months was seen as the only independent risk factor increasing the frequency of infection (R = 0.30; p = 0.016). Survival analysis at 60 days, 1 year and 2 years showed no difference between the two groups (p = 0.09).
Conclusions:
Despite advances in pump technology and surgical technique, infection is still an important cause of mortality and morbidity.</abstract><cop>London, England</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><pmid>33971762</pmid><doi>10.1177/03913988211013367</doi><tpages>8</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7198-069X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1705-4999</orcidid></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0391-3988 |
| ispartof | International journal of artificial organs, 2021-12, Vol.44 (12), p.972-979 |
| issn | 0391-3988 1724-6040 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2525662278 |
| source | MEDLINE; SAGE Complete A-Z List |
| subjects | Demography Emergency medical care Emergency medical services Health risks Heart Heart Failure - surgery Heart-Assist Devices Humans Implantation Infections Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures Morbidity Ostomy Prosthesis-Related Infections - epidemiology Prosthesis-Related Infections - prevention & control Retrospective Studies Risk analysis Risk factors Risk management Sternotomy - adverse effects Surgical techniques Survival analysis Thoracotomy - adverse effects Ventricle |
| title | Does minimally invasive approach reduce risk of infection after ventricular assist device implantation? |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-20T12%3A27%3A23IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Does%20minimally%20invasive%20approach%20reduce%20risk%20of%20infection%20after%20ventricular%20assist%20device%20implantation?&rft.jtitle=International%20journal%20of%20artificial%20organs&rft.au=Kervan,%20Umit&rft.date=2021-12&rft.volume=44&rft.issue=12&rft.spage=972&rft.epage=979&rft.pages=972-979&rft.issn=0391-3988&rft.eissn=1724-6040&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/03913988211013367&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2525662278%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2606930100&rft_id=info:pmid/33971762&rft_sage_id=10.1177_03913988211013367&rfr_iscdi=true |