Steven A. Goldstein, MD, Co-Chair, Arturo Evangelista, MD, FESC, Co-Chair, Suhny Abbara, MD, Andrew Arai, MD, Federico M. Asch, MD, FASE, Luigi P. Badano, MD, PhD, FESC, Michael A. Bolen, MD, Heidi M. Connolly, MD, Hug Cu ellar-Cal abria, MD, Martin Czerny, MD, Richard B. Devereux, MD, Raimund A. Erbel, MD, FASE, FESC, Rossella Fattori, MD, Eric M. Isselbacher, MD, Joseph M. Lindsay, MD, Marti McCulloch, MBA, RDCS, FASE, Hector I. Michelena, MD, FASE, Christoph A. Nienaber, MD, FESC, Jae K. Oh, MD, FASE, Mauro Pepi, MD, FESC, Allen J. Taylor, MD, Jonathan W. Weinsaft, MD, Jose Luis Zamorano, MD, FESC, FASE, Contributing Editors: Harry Dietz, MD, Kim Eagle, MD, John Elefteriades, MD, Guillaume Jondeau, MD, PhD, FESC, Herv e Rousseau, MD, PhD, and Marc Schepens, MD, Washington, District of Columbia; Barcelona and Madrid, Spain; Dallas and Houston, Texas; Bethesda and Baltimore, Maryland; Padua, Pesaro, and Milan, Italy; Cleveland, Ohio; Rochester, Minnesota; Zurich, Switzerland; New York, New York; Essen and Rostock, Germany; Boston, Massachusetts; Ann Arbor, Michigan; New Haven, Connecticut; Paris and Toulouse, France; and Brugge, Belgium

https://www.anmco.it/uploads/u_cms/media/2015/3/ba5b5c8a69e9f498ed500621c8ac3d39.pdf

Multimodality imaging of diseases of the thoracic aorta in adults: From the American society of echocardiography and the european association of cardiovascular imaging: Endorsed by the society of cardiovascular computed tomography and society for cardiovascular magnetic resonance

More than a century ago, Osler took numerous syndrome descriptions of cardiac valvular infection that were incomplete and confusing and categorized them into the cardiovascular infections known as infective endocarditis. Because he was both a clinician and a pathologist, he was able to provide a meaningful outline of this complex disease. Technical advances have allowed us to better subcategorize infective endocarditis on the basis of microbiological etiology. More recently, the syndromes of infective endocarditis and endarteritis have been expanded to include infections involving a variety of cardiovascular prostheses and devices that are used to replace or assist damaged or dysfunctional tissues (Table 1). Taken together, infections of these novel intracardiac, arterial, and venous devices are frequently seen in medical centers throughout the developed world. In response, the American Heart Association’s Committee on Rheumatic Fever, Endocarditis, and Kawasaki Disease wrote this review to assist and educate clinicians who care for an increasing number of patients with nonvalvular cardiovascular device–related infections. Because timely guidelines1,2 exist that address the prevention and management of intravascular catheter–related infections, these device-related infections are not discussed in the present Statement. 

View this table:

TABLE 1. Nonvalvular Cardiovascular Device–Related Infections 



This review is divided into two broad sections. The first section examines general principles for the evaluation and management of infection that apply to all nonvalvular cardiovascular devices. Despite the marked variability in composition, structure, function, and frequency of infection among the various types of nonvalvular cardiovascular devices reviewed in this article, there are several areas of commonality for infection of these devices. These include clinical manifestations, microbiology, pathogenesis, diagnosis, treatment, and prevention. The second section addresses each device and describes unique clinical features of infection. Each device is placed into one of 3 categories—intracardiac, arterial, or venous—for discussion.

### Clinical Manifestations

The specific signs and symptoms associated with an infection of a …

http://www.endocardites-aquitaine.fr/fileadmin/documents/documents/2003BADDOUR.pdf

Nonvalvular Cardiovascular Device–Related Infections

### Background

The use of synthetic material for reconstructive vascular surgery was first reported during the early 1950s. Infection involving vascular graft prostheses is an infrequent but devastating complication of reconstructive vascular graft surgery and is associated with a high morbidity and, in some situations, mortality. Improvements in surgical techniques and graft design, including the use of native venous or arterial tissue, have reduced the frequency of infection and severity of complications from vascular graft infection (VGI). However, these advances have also led to more frequent vascular graft procedures occurring in a patient population with multiple underlying comorbidities that would have previously disqualified them as candidates for vascular reconstructive surgery. Underlying comorbidities, such as diabetes mellitus or immune compromise, increase the risk of infection and serious infection-related complications. The major complications of VGI include sepsis, amputation, disruption of infected anastomotic suture line with rupture or pseudoaneurysm formation, embolization of infected thrombi, reinfection of reconstructed vascular grafts, enteric fistulae to the small or large bowel, bacteremic spread of infection to other sites, and death. VGIs can be categorized broadly into those that occur in an extracavitary location, primarily in the groin or lower extremities, or in an intracavitary location, primarily within the abdomen or less commonly within the thorax.

### Frequency

The frequency of VGI depends on the anatomic location of the graft. The infection rate is 1.5% to 2% for most extracavitary grafts and as high as 6% with vascular grafts in the groin.1–9 For intracavitary grafts, the infection rate is ≈1% to 5%.1–6 Graft infection is most common after emergency procedures and after reoperation.1–4,10 Aortic graft erosion or fistulous communication into the duodenum or other areas of the bowel reportedly occurs in 1% to 2% of patients after aortic reconstruction.11, …

Vascular Graft Infections, Mycotic Aneurysms, and Endovascular Infections: A Scientific Statement from the American Heart Association

Editor's Choice - European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) 2020 Clinical Practice Guidelines on the Management of Vascular Graft and Endograft Infections.

https://www.jvascsurg.org/article/S0741-5214(05)01243-7/pdf

Detection of aortic graft infection by fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography: Comparison with computed tomographic findings

Prosthetic graft infections are an uncommon complication of aortic bypass. These infections may have serious sequelae such as limb loss and can be lethal. They are hard to eradicate and, under certain circumstances, difficult to diagnose. Usually, computed tomography (CT) is the most efficacious imaging method for diagnosis of graft infections due to its quick availability. The sensitivity of magnetic resonance imaging in detection of perigraft infection has not been thoroughly investigated but is probably similar to that of CT. After the early postoperative period, persistent or expanding perigraft soft tissue, fluid, and gas are the CT findings of graft infection. Aortoenteric fistula should be considered a subset of aortic graft infection; however, perigraft air is more likely to be seen with an aortoenteric fistula. Other conditions associated with graft infection include pseudoaneurysm, hydronephrosis, and osteomyelitis. Adjunctive studies such as sinography, ultrasonography, gallium scanning, and labeled white blood cell scanning can be quite useful in diagnosis, determination of the extent of disease, and selection of the treatment modality. White blood cell scanning is an important complementary test to CT in ambiguous cases, such as in the early postoperative period, and may be more sensitive in detection of early graft infection.

Jeff L. Fidler

Papers

Aortic prosthetic graft infections: radiologic manifestations and implications for management.