Infective Native Aortic Aneurysm: a Delphi Consensus Document on Treatment, Follow Up, and Definition of Cure.

Wyss, Thomas R.; Giardini, Matteo; Sörelius, Karl (2024). Infective Native Aortic Aneurysm: a Delphi Consensus Document on Treatment, Follow Up, and Definition of Cure. European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery, 67(4), pp. 654-661. Elsevier 10.1016/j.ejvs.2023.12.008

Preview	Text 1-s2.0-S1078588423009899-main.pdf - Accepted Version Available under License Creative Commons: Attribution (CC-BY). Download (568kB) | Preview
Preview	Text 1-s2.0-S1078588423009899-main.pdf - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons: Attribution (CC-BY). Download (756kB) | Preview

OBJECTIVE

Evidence is lacking to guide the management of infective native aortic aneurysm (INAA). The aim of this study was to establish expert consensus on surgical and antimicrobial treatment and follow up, and to define when an INAA is considered cured.

METHODS

Delphi methodology was used. The principal investigators invited 47 international experts (specialists in infectious diseases, radiology, nuclear medicine, and vascular and cardiothoracic surgery) via email. Four Delphi rounds were performed, 3 weeks each, using an online questionnaire with initially 28 statements. The panelists rated the statements on a 5 point Likert scale. Comments on statements were analysed, statements were revised and added or deleted, and the results were presented in the iterative rounds. Consensus was defined as ≥ 75% of the panel rating a statement as strongly agree or agree on the Likert scale, and consensus on the final assessment was defined as Cronbach's α > 0.80.

RESULTS

All 49 panelists fulfilled all four rounds, resulting in 100% participation. One statement was added based on the results and comments of the panel, resulting in 29 final statements: n = 3 on need for consensus, n = 20 on treatment, n = 5 on follow up, and n = 1 on definition of cure. All 29 statements reached agreement of ≥ 86%. Cronbach's α increased for each consecutive round; round 1, 0.85; round 2, 0.90; round 3, 0.91; and round 4, 0.94. Thus, consensus was reached for all statements.

CONCLUSION

INAA is rare, and high level evidence is lacking to guide optimal management. This consensus document was established with the aim of helping clinicians manage these challenging patients, as a supplement to current guidelines. The presented consensus will need future amendments in accordance with newly acquired knowledge.

Interest & Impact

Downloads

41 since deposited on 15 Dec 2023
41 in the past 12 months

Citations

5 Citations in Web of Science ®
6 Citations in Scopus

Search

in Google Scholar™

Services

Actions (login required)

Edit item

Actions (login required)

Edit item