Clinical Studies Reporting on Vascular Graft Coatings for the Prevention of Aortic Graft Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of vascular graft coatings used in the aortic position to prevent vascular graft infection (VGI). METHODS: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines using a pre-registered protocol (CRD42020206436). Eligible studies used a vascular graft coating in the aortic position and reported on VGI. A search was performed in MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. Primary outcome parameters were VGI, patency, and mortality. Pooled estimates of VGI were calculated using odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) wherever possible. Quality assessment was performed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Assessment Scale and the Revised Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomised trials. RESULTS: In total, 6 873 papers were identified. Only eight studies were included. Six of eight studies (75%) reported on known antimicrobial coating strategies such as antibiotics (n = 3) and silver (n = 3). In the other two studies, polymer coated grafts were used. Only three of eight studies compared coated with uncoated grafts (two antibiotic and one silver). Two randomised controlled trials reported on the effect of rifampicin soaked (1 mg/mL) grafts and showed no significant effect in the early (2 months; OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.29 - 1.62) or late (2 years; OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.23 - 2.32) post-operative periods. A retrospective cohort study focusing on the effect of silver coated grafts did not reveal any advantage (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.02 - 1.64). Two polymer coated grafts were not considered to have a potential benefit in the prevention of VGIs. CONCLUSION: Clinical studies reporting on the antibacterial effect of vascular graft coatings in the aortic position to prevent VGI are scarce. For silver and antibiotic coatings, no significant protection for VGI was observed. New types of grafts or long acting coating strategies are mandatory to prevent this complication in the future.

Left ventricular function recovery after ST-elevation myocardial infarction: correlates and outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Contemporary data on left ventricular function (LVF) recovery in patients with left ventricular dysfunction after ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) are scarce and to date, no comparison has been made with patients with a baseline normal LVF. This study examined predictors of LVF recovery and its relation to outcomes in STEMI. METHODS: Patients presenting with STEMI between January 2010 and December 2016 were categorized in three groups after 3 months according to left ventricular ejection fraction (EF): (i) baseline normal LVF (EF ≥ 50% at baseline); (ii) recovered LVF (EF < 50% at baseline and ≥ 50% after 3 months); and (iii) reduced LVF (EF < 50% at baseline and after 3 months). Heart failure hospitalization, all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality were compared between the three groups. RESULTS: Of 577 patients, 341 (59%) patients had a baseline normal LVF, 112 (19%) had a recovered LVF and 124 (22%) had a reduced LVF. Independent correlates of LVF recovery were higher baseline EF, lower peak troponin and cardiac arrest. After median 5.8 years, there was no difference in outcomes between patients with LVF recovery and baseline normal LVF. In contrast, even after multivariate adjustment, patients with persistently reduced LVF had a higher risk for heart failure hospitalization (HR 5.00; 95% CI 2.17-11.46) and all-cause mortality (HR 1.87; 95% CI 1.11-3.16). CONCLUSION: In contemporary treated STEMI patients, prognosis is significantly worse in those with a persistently reduced LVF after 3 months, compared with patients with a baseline normal LVF and those with LVF recovery.