Utili Riccardo, Durante-Mangoni Emanuele, Tripodi Marie-Françoise
Department of Cardiothoracic and Respiratory Sciences, Unit of Infectious and Transplant Medicine, Second University of Naples, Monaldi Hospital, Naples, Italy.
Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2007 Nov;30 Suppl 1:S42-50. doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2007.06.028. Epub 2007 Sep 14.
Long-term antimicrobial therapy may be effective in some patients with intravascular prosthesis infection. However, this approach does not represent an alternative to surgery when this is feasible, but is merely the best opportunity for patients too ill to tolerate a re-intervention. Prosthetic valve endocarditis may be treated with antibiotic therapy alone in selected patients who are haemodynamically stable with non-staphylococcal infections and no para-valvular complications. In contrast, infections of pacemaker leads or other implantable cardiac devices require complete hardware removal, as infection recurrence always occurs, even after a seemingly effective initial treatment. Attempts to treat conservatively infections of abdominal aortic grafts can be successful in a few cases, provided the patient is stable, the pathogen has been identified, and antibiotic susceptibility has been demonstrated. Treatment requires at least 4-6 weeks and may be followed by a sequential oral regimen once the acute phase of the infection has subsided. The correct duration of this treatment is often unknown and relapses are common after treatment withdrawal. The availability of novel antibacterial and antifungal agents - showing fast microbicidal activity that includes biofilm micro-organisms - such as daptomycin and caspofungin, or having a wide antimicrobial spectrum, such as tigecycline, may increase the probability of long-standing suppression or even eradication of the infection in these particular subsets of inoperable patients. However, so far, very little experience is available on the efficacy and tolerability of these drugs in intravascular prosthesis infections. Controlled studies are lacking and difficult to plan. Well-designed prospective studies may help to establish guidelines and reach a multidisciplinary consensus on the optimal therapeutic approach, and are therefore awaited.
长期抗菌治疗可能对一些血管内假体感染患者有效。然而,当手术可行时,这种方法并非手术的替代方案,而仅仅是对于病情过重无法耐受再次干预的患者的最佳选择。对于血流动力学稳定、非葡萄球菌感染且无瓣周并发症的特定患者,人工瓣膜心内膜炎可仅用抗生素治疗。相比之下,起搏器导线或其他植入式心脏装置的感染需要完全移除硬件,因为即使经过看似有效的初始治疗,感染仍会复发。对于腹主动脉移植物感染,在患者病情稳定、病原体已确定且已证明抗生素敏感性的情况下,少数病例保守治疗可能成功。治疗至少需要4至6周,一旦感染急性期消退,可随后采用序贯口服方案。这种治疗的正确持续时间通常未知,停药后复发很常见。新型抗菌和抗真菌药物的出现——如达托霉素和卡泊芬净,具有快速杀菌活性,包括对生物膜微生物的活性,或如替加环素具有广泛抗菌谱——可能会增加在这些无法手术的特定患者亚组中长期抑制甚至根除感染的可能性。然而,到目前为止,关于这些药物在血管内假体感染中的疗效和耐受性的经验非常少。缺乏对照研究且难以规划。精心设计的前瞻性研究可能有助于制定指南并就最佳治疗方法达成多学科共识,因此人们期待着这类研究。