OBJECTIVES: Poor results have been reported following infrainguinal reconstructions using heterogenous grafts. The objective of this study was to assess the use of bovine mesenteric vein (ProCol) graft in patients with critical limb ischaemia (CLI), tissue loss/infection and no autologous vein available for reconstruction. METHODS: Prospective analysis of 32 patients with CLI and tissue loss/infection, in whom reconstruction with ProCol was undertaken between October 1999 and May 2002. RESULTS: The primary patency rate was 16% at 1 month. After thrombectomy, the secondary patency rate was 50% at 1 month and 26% at 14 months. No graft infections were seen. Aneurysmal dilatation of the graft occurred in 2 (6%). Limb salvage at 14 months was 47%. CONCLUSION: In patients with critical limb ischaemia, tissue loss/infection and no available vein, the ProCol graft may be an alternative. However, primary patency is a problem. In situations without tissue loss/infection, where the risk of graft infection is less, prosthetic material may be a better alternative.
OBJECTIVES: Poor results have been reported following infrainguinal reconstructions using heterogenous grafts. The objective of this study was to assess the use of bovine mesenteric vein (ProCol) graft in patients with critical limb ischaemia (CLI), tissue loss/infection and no autologous vein available for reconstruction. METHODS: Prospective analysis of 32 patients with CLI and tissue loss/infection, in whom reconstruction with ProCol was undertaken between October 1999 and May 2002. RESULTS: The primary patency rate was 16% at 1 month. After thrombectomy, the secondary patency rate was 50% at 1 month and 26% at 14 months. No graft infections were seen. Aneurysmal dilatation of the graft occurred in 2 (6%). Limb salvage at 14 months was 47%. CONCLUSION: In patients with critical limb ischaemia, tissue loss/infection and no available vein, the ProCol graft may be an alternative. However, primary patency is a problem. In situations without tissue loss/infection, where the risk of graft infection is less, prosthetic material may be a better alternative.
Authors: Jeffrey H Lawson; Marc H Glickman; Marek Ilzecki; Tomasz Jakimowicz; Andrzej Jaroszynski; Eric K Peden; Alison J Pilgrim; Heather L Prichard; Malgorzata Guziewicz; Stanisław Przywara; Jacek Szmidt; Jakub Turek; Wojciech Witkiewicz; Norbert Zapotoczny; Tomasz Zubilewicz; Laura E Niklason Journal: Lancet Date: 2016-05-14 Impact factor: 79.321