• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

轴突部位不是导致心室辅助装置植入后感染的预测因子。

Driveline Site Is Not a Predictor of Infection After Ventricular Assist Device Implantation.

机构信息

From the Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Stanford University, Stanford, California.

Division of Cardiac Surgery, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.

出版信息

ASAIO J. 2018 Sep/Oct;64(5):616-622. doi: 10.1097/MAT.0000000000000690.

DOI:10.1097/MAT.0000000000000690
PMID:29035899
Abstract

Driveline infections (DLIs) remain a major source of morbidity for patients requiring long-term ventricular assist device (VAD) support. We aimed to assess whether VAD driveline exit site (DLES) (abdomen versus chest wall) is associated with DLI. All adult patients who underwent insertion of a HeartWare HVAD or HeartMate II (HMII) between 2009 and 2016 were included. Driveline infection was defined as clinical evidence of DLI accompanied by a positive bacterial swab and need for antibiotics. Competing risks analysis was used to assess the association between patient characteristics and DLI. Ninety-two devices (59 HMII) were implanted in 85 patients (72 men; median age 57.4 years) for bridge to transplant or destination therapy. VAD DLES was chest in 28 (30.4%) devices. Median time on VAD support was 347.5 days (IQR 145.5, 757.5), with 28 transplants and 29 deaths (27 on device). DLI occurred in 24 patients (25 devices) at a median of 140 days (IQR 67, 314) from implant. Staphylococcus aureus accounted for 15 infections (60%). Freedom from infection was 72.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 53.1-78.0%) at 1 year and 41.9% (95% CI 21.1-61.5%) at 3 years. In competing risks regression, abdominal DLES was not predictive of DLI (hazard ratio, HR 1.65 [95% CI 0.63, 4.29]), but body mass index (BMI) >30 kg/m was (HR 2.72 [95% CI 1.25, 5.92]). In conclusion, risk of DLI is high among patients on long-term VAD support, and a nonabdominal DLES does not reduce this risk. The only predictor of DLI in this series was an elevated BMI.

摘要

移植物血管通道感染(DLI)仍然是需要长期心室辅助装置(VAD)支持的患者发病的主要原因。我们旨在评估 VAD 移植物血管通道出口部位(DLES)(腹部与胸壁)是否与 DLI 相关。所有 2009 年至 2016 年间接受 HeartWare HVAD 或 HeartMate II(HMII)植入的成年患者均纳入研究。DLI 的定义为伴有阳性细菌拭子和需要抗生素的 DLI 的临床证据。使用竞争风险分析来评估患者特征与 DLI 之间的关联。85 名患者(72 名男性;中位年龄 57.4 岁)共植入 92 个装置(59 个 HMII),用于桥接移植或作为终末期心力衰竭的治疗方法。28 个装置的 VAD DLES 在胸部。中位 VAD 支持时间为 347.5 天(IQR 145.5,757.5),有 28 例移植和 29 例死亡(27 例在装置上)。24 名患者(25 个装置)在植入后中位 140 天(IQR 67,314)发生 DLI。金黄色葡萄球菌引起 15 例感染(60%)。感染无复发率在 1 年时为 72.8%(95%CI 53.1-78.0%),在 3 年时为 41.9%(95%CI 21.1-61.5%)。在竞争风险回归中,腹部 DLES 与 DLI 无相关性(风险比,HR 1.65[95%CI 0.63,4.29]),但 BMI>30kg/m 时为(HR 2.72[95%CI 1.25,5.92])。总之,长期 VAD 支持的患者发生 DLI 的风险较高,而非腹部 DLES 并不能降低这种风险。本系列中 DLI 的唯一预测因子是升高的 BMI。

相似文献

1
Driveline Site Is Not a Predictor of Infection After Ventricular Assist Device Implantation.轴突部位不是导致心室辅助装置植入后感染的预测因子。
ASAIO J. 2018 Sep/Oct;64(5):616-622. doi: 10.1097/MAT.0000000000000690.
2
Impact of chlorhexidine gluconate intolerance on driveline infection during chronic HeartMate II left ventricular assist device support.葡萄糖酸氯己定不耐受对慢性HeartMate II左心室辅助装置支持期间导线感染的影响。
Int J Artif Organs. 2017 Jan 13;39(11):570-574. doi: 10.5301/ijao.5000539. Epub 2017 Jan 12.
3
Driveline Infection Risk with Utilization of a Temporary External Anchoring Suture After Implantation of a Left Ventricular Assist Device.植入左心室辅助装置后使用临时外部锚定缝线的传动系统感染风险
ASAIO J. 2016 May-Jun;62(3):291-6. doi: 10.1097/MAT.0000000000000346.
4
Driveline Infection in Patients With Left Ventricular Assist Devices Implanted as Destination Therapy.左心室辅助装置作为终末期治疗植入患者的输线型感染。
Transplant Proc. 2024 May;56(4):860-863. doi: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2024.03.029. Epub 2024 May 11.
5
Ventricular Assist Device Driveline Infections: A Systematic Review.心室辅助装置驱动线感染:一项系统综述
Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2022 Sep;70(6):493-504. doi: 10.1055/s-0041-1731823. Epub 2021 Sep 14.
6
Left ventricular assist device driveline infections in three contemporary devices.三种当代心室辅助装置的驱动轴感染。
Artif Organs. 2021 May;45(5):464-472. doi: 10.1111/aor.13843. Epub 2020 Nov 28.
7
Evolution and impact of drive-line infection in a large cohort of continuous-flow ventricular assist device recipients.连续血流心室辅助装置受者中驱动线感染的演变和影响。
J Heart Lung Transplant. 2014 Nov;33(11):1164-72. doi: 10.1016/j.healun.2014.05.011. Epub 2014 Jun 5.
8
Comparing velour versus silicone interfaces at the driveline exit site of HeartMate II devices: infection rates, histopathology, and ultrastructural aspects.比较HeartMate II设备动力线出口部位的天鹅绒与硅胶界面:感染率、组织病理学及超微结构方面
Cardiovasc Pathol. 2015 Mar-Apr;24(2):71-5. doi: 10.1016/j.carpath.2014.07.011. Epub 2014 Oct 22.
9
Prevention and early treatment of driveline infections in ventricular assist device patients - The DESTINE staging proposal and the first standard of care protocol.预防和早期治疗心室辅助装置患者的移植物感染——DESTINE 分期建议和首个标准治疗方案。
J Crit Care. 2020 Apr;56:106-112. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2019.12.014. Epub 2019 Dec 17.
10
Adverse events in contemporary continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices: A multi-institutional comparison shows significant differences.当代连续血流左心室辅助装置中的不良事件:多机构比较显示出显著差异。
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2016 Jan;151(1):177-89. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2015.09.100. Epub 2015 Nov 4.

引用本文的文献

1
Decreasing driveline infections in patients supported on ventricular assist devices: a care pathway approach.降低心室辅助装置支持患者的导管相关感染:一种护理途径方法。
BMJ Open Qual. 2022 May;11(2). doi: 10.1136/bmjoq-2022-001815.
2
Prevalence and management of driveline infections in mechanical circulatory support - a single center analysis.机械循环支持装置中电源线感染的发生率和处理-单中心分析。
J Cardiothorac Surg. 2021 Aug 3;16(1):216. doi: 10.1186/s13019-021-01589-6.
3
Continuous-flow left ventricular assist device systems infections: current outcomes and management strategies.
连续流左心室辅助装置系统感染:当前的治疗结果及管理策略
Ann Cardiothorac Surg. 2021 Mar;10(2):233-239. doi: 10.21037/acs-2020-cfmcs-26.
4
Ventricular Assist Device-Specific Infections.心室辅助装置相关感染
J Clin Med. 2021 Jan 25;10(3):453. doi: 10.3390/jcm10030453.
5
In Full Flow: Left Ventricular Assist Device Infections in the Modern Era.全面解析:现代左心室辅助装置感染
Open Forum Infect Dis. 2020 Apr 17;7(5):ofaa124. doi: 10.1093/ofid/ofaa124. eCollection 2020 May.
6
Management and outcomes of left ventricular assist device-associated endocarditis: a systematic review.左心室辅助装置相关心内膜炎的管理与结局:一项系统评价
Ann Cardiothorac Surg. 2019 Nov;8(6):600-609. doi: 10.21037/acs.2019.04.04.