Literature DB >> 15746730

Randomized trial of endoscopic versus open vein harvest for coronary artery bypass grafting: six-month patency rates.

Kwok L Yun1, YingXing Wu, Vicken Aharonian, Prakash Mansukhani, Thomas A Pfeffer, Colleen F Sintek, Gary S Kochamba, Gary Grunkemeier, Siavosh Khonsari.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: We sought to compare the 6-month angiographic patency rates of greater saphenous veins removed during coronary artery bypass grafting with the endoscopic vein harvest or open vein harvest techniques.
METHODS: Two hundred patients undergoing nonemergency on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting were prospectively randomized to either endoscopic vein harvest or open vein harvest. Follow-up angiography of all vein grafts was scheduled at 6 months. Graft patency and disease grades were assigned independently by 2 interventional cardiologists. Leg wound healing was evaluated at discharge, 1 month, and 6 months for evidence of complications.
RESULTS: There were 3 conversions from endoscopic vein harvest to open vein harvest because of vein factors. Leg wound complications were significantly lower in the endoscopic vein harvest group (7.4% vs 19.4%, P = .014). On multivariable analysis, endoscopic vein harvest emerged as the only factor affecting wound complications (odds ratio, 0.33). Three deaths (2 perioperative and 1 late) occurred in the endoscopic vein harvest group that were unrelated to vein graft closure. Twenty-four and 29 patients in the endoscopic vein harvest and open vein harvest cohorts, respectively, refused the follow-up 6-month angiography. Therefore a total of 144 angiograms (73 endoscopic vein harvests and 71 open vein harvests) and 336 vein grafts (166 endoscopic vein harvests and 170 open vein harvests) were available for analysis. The overall occlusion rates at 6 months were 21.7% for endoscopic vein harvest and 17.6% for open vein harvest. Additionally, there was evidence of significant disease (>50% stenosis) in 10.2% and 12.4% of endoscopic vein harvest and open vein harvest grafts, respectively. By means of ordinal hierarchic logistic regression, endoscopic vein harvest was not found to be a risk factor for vein graft occlusion or disease (odds ratio, 1.15). Significant predictors were congestive heart failure (odds ratio, 2.87), graft to the diagonal artery territory (odds ratio, 1.76), larger vein conduit size (odds ratio, 1.32), and graft flow (odds ratio, 0.90).
CONCLUSION: Endoscopic vein harvest reduces leg wound complications compared with open vein harvest without compromising the 6-month patency rate. The overall patency rate depends on target and vein-related variables and patient characteristics rather than the method of vein harvesting.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15746730     DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2004.08.054

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg        ISSN: 0022-5223            Impact factor:   5.209


  33 in total

1.  Influence of tangential stress on mechanical responses to vasoactive agents in human saphenous vein with and without perivascular adipose tissue.

Authors:  Carol Ann Ford; Kam Mong; Reza Tabrizchi
Journal:  Can J Cardiol       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 5.223

2.  Hybrid approach to multivessel coronary artery disease: a commentary.

Authors:  Alberto Repossini
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2016-10

3.  Can preoperative myocardial perfusion scintigraphy predict changes in left ventricular perfusion and function after coronary artery bypass graft surgery?

Authors:  Rozy Eckardt; Bo Juel Kjeldsen; Allan Johansen; Peter Grupe; Torben Haghfelt; Per Thayssen; Lars Ib Andersen; Birger Hesse
Journal:  Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg       Date:  2012-04-02

4.  The transition from open to endoscopic saphenous vein harvesting and its clinical impact: The Texas Heart Institute experience.

Authors:  Tianjie Lai; Yarrow Babb; Qian Ning; Luz Reyes; Thanh Dao; Vei-Vei Lee; Laurie Mitchell; Layne O Gentry; Ross M Reul; David A Ott
Journal:  Tex Heart Inst J       Date:  2006

5.  Secondary surgical-site infection after coronary artery bypass grafting: A multi-institutional prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Brian C Gulack; Katherine A Kirkwood; Wei Shi; Peter K Smith; John H Alexander; Sandra G Burks; Annetine C Gelijns; Vinod H Thourani; Daniel Bell; Ann Greenberg; Seth D Goldfarb; Mary Lou Mayer; Michael E Bowdish
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2017-12-06       Impact factor: 5.209

Review 6.  Endoscopic vein harvesting: technique, outcomes, concerns & controversies.

Authors:  Shahzad G Raja; Zubair Sarang
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2013-11       Impact factor: 2.895

Review 7.  Coronary vein graft disease: pathogenesis and prevention.

Authors:  Pirouz Parang; Rohit Arora
Journal:  Can J Cardiol       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 5.223

8.  Endoscopic harvesting device type and outcomes in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery.

Authors:  Sean van Diepen; J Matthew Brennan; Gail E Hafley; Eric M Reyes; Keith B Allen; T Bruce Ferguson; Eric D Peterson; Judson B Williams; C Michael Gibson; Michael J Mack; Nicholas T Kouchoukos; John H Alexander; Renato D Lopes
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 12.969

9.  A prospective audit of endoscopic vein harvesting for coronary artery bypass surgery.

Authors:  Zakariya Waqar-Uddin; Manoj Purohit; Nadene Blakeman; Joseph Zacharias
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2009-04-30       Impact factor: 1.891

10.  Postoperative and mid-term wound disturbance outcomes of minimally invasive saphenous vein harvest using the VEGA system.

Authors:  Martin Simek; Petr Nemec
Journal:  Heart Vessels       Date:  2007-03-23       Impact factor: 2.037

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.