ArticleSurgery today2016
Which prosthesis is more resistant to vascular graft infection: polytetrafluoroethylene or Omniflow II biosynthetic grafts?
Article in Surgery today, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial Neutrophils Against Vascular Graft Infection.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2024Article
- Aortic treatment of native infection by reconstruction with the Omniflow II biologic prosthesis.Journal of vascular surgery cases and innovative techniques · 2018Article
- The antibacterial effect of mesenchymThe antibacterial effect of mesenchymal stem cells on graft infections: An experimental studyal stem cells on graft infections: An experimental study.Turk gogus kalp damar cerrahisi dergisi · 2018Article
- The impact of inflow treatment for claudicants with both aortoiliac and femoropopliteal occlusive disease.Surgery today · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this study was to determine whether polytetrafluoroethylene grafts or Omniflow II biosynthetic grafts are more resistant to infection caused by Staphylococcus aureus.
methodsSixty rats were divided into six groups. In Groups 1A, 1B and 1C, a polytetrafluoroethylene graft was implanted in each rat, and, in Groups 2A, 2B and 2C, a biosynthetic graft was implanted in each rat. Staphylococcus aureus was inoculated into Groups 1B, 1C, 2B and 2C, and the rats in Groups 1C and 2C were treated with teicoplanin. One week later, the rats were euthanized, the grafts were removed and a microbiological count was performed. A histopathological examination was subsequently carried out, and the C-reactive protein, prealbumin and leukocyte levels were investigated.
resultsThere were no significant differences in the C-reactive protein, prealbumin and leukocyte levels. The differences in the results of the microbiological evaluations between the groups were significant. The quantitative culture results showed no bacterial growth in Groups 1A, 1C and 2A. The number of bacteria in Group 1B was statistically lower than that in Group 2B. When the groups receiving treatment were compared, Group 2C had bacterial growth, whereas Group 1C did not. The histopathological examinations showed similar results.
conclusionsOmniflow II grafts are more susceptible to infection than polytetrafluoroethylene grafts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.