Risk assessment of significant upper extremity arteriovenous graft infection in the Vascular Quality Initiative.

OBJECTIVE

Infectious complications of arteriovenous grafts (AVGs) are a major source of morbidity. Our aim was to characterize contemporary risk factors for upper extremity AVG infection.

METHODS

The Vascular Quality Initiative (2011-2018) was queried for all patients undergoing upper extremity AVG creation. AVG infection was classified as an infection treated with antibiotics, incision and drainage, or graft removal. Multivariable analyses were used to evaluate risk factors for short- and long-term AVG infection.

RESULTS

Of 1758 upper extremity AVGs, 49 (2.8%) developed significant infection within 3 months, resulting in incision and drainage in 24% and graft removal in 76% of cases. None were managed with antibiotics alone in the study sample. Patients with significant AVG infection were more likely to be white, to be insured, to have a history of coronary artery bypass graft and intravenous (IV) drug use, to be undergoing a concomitant vascular procedure, and to be discharged on an anticoagulant. In multivariable analysis, significant AVG infection within 3 months was associated with IV drug use history (odds ratio [OR], 5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.75-14.3; P = .003), discharge to a health care facility (OR, 2.66; 95% CI, 1.07-6.63; P = .035), discharge on an anticoagulant (OR, 2.31; 95% CI, 1.13-4.72; P = .021), white race (OR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.21-4.34; P = .011), and female sex (OR, 2.02; 95% CI, 1.06-3.85; P = .033). Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that freedom from graft site infection at 1 year was 96.4%. Longer term graft infection at 1 year was independently associated with IV drug use history (hazard ratio [HR], 1.98; 95% CI, 1.06-3.68; P = .032), initial discharge to a health care facility (HR, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.19-2.97; P = .007), and white race (HR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.23-2.19; P = .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Although significant AVG infection was uncommon in the Vascular Quality Initiative, the majority were treated with graft removal. In select high-risk patients, extra care should be taken and alternative forms of arteriovenous access may be considered.