Literature DB >> 24370082

Endoscopic versus open saphenous vein graft harvest for lower extremity bypass in critical limb ischemia.

Raymond E Eid1, Li Wang2, Michael Kuzman1, Ghassan Abu-Hamad1, Michael Singh1, Luke K Marone1, Steven A Leers1, Rabih A Chaer3.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Endoscopic vein harvest (EVH) has been demonstrated to improve early morbidity when compared with conventional open vein harvest (OVH) technique for infrainguinal bypass surgery. However, recent literature suggests conflicting results regarding mid- and long-term patency with EVH. The purpose of this study is to compare graft patency between harvest techniques specifically in patients with critical limb ischemia.
METHODS: This retrospective study compared two groups of patients (EVH = 39 and OVH = 49) undergoing lower extremity revascularization from January 2009 to December 2011. Outcome measures included patency rates, postoperative complications, and wound infection. Graft patency was assessed using Kaplan-Meier curves.
RESULTS: Both groups were matched for demographics and indications for bypass (critical limb ischemia). Median follow-up was 22 months. There was a significant reduction in the incidence of wound infection at the vein harvest site in the EVH group (OVH = 20%; EVH = 0%; P < .001), nevertheless, the difference was not significant when only the anastomotic sites were included (OVH = 12.2%; EVH = 15.4%; P = .43). The hospital length of stay was comparable between the two groups (EVH = 8.73 ± 9.69; OVH = 6.35 ± 3.28; P = .26) with no significant difference in the recovery time. Primary graft patency rate was 43.2% in the EVH group and 69.4% in the OVH group (P = .007) at 3 years. The most common reason for loss of primary patency was graft occlusion (61.5%) in the OVH group and vein graft stenosis (54.5%) in the EVH group. The average number of vascular reinterventions per bypass graft was significantly lower in the OVH group compared with the EVH group (OVH = 0.37; EVH = 1.28; P < .001).
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate inferior primary patency when using the technique of EVH. Additionally, we identified a significantly higher rate of reintervention in the EVH cohort as well as a higher rate of vein graft body stenosis. However, EVH was associated with a decreased rate of wound complications with similar limb salvage and secondary patency rates when compared to OVH. EVH should therefore be selectively utilized in patients at high risk for wound complications.
Copyright © 2014 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24370082      PMCID: PMC4082991          DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2013.06.072

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Vasc Surg        ISSN: 0741-5214            Impact factor:   4.268


  27 in total

1.  Clinical benefits of endoscopic vein harvesting in patients with risk factors for saphenectomy wound infections undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting.

Authors:  P A Carpino; K R Khabbaz; R M Bojar; H Rastegar; K G Warner; R E Murphy; D D Payne
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 5.209

2.  Endoscopic Vascular Harvest in Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Surgery: A Consensus Statement of the International Society of Minimally Invasive Cardiothoracic Surgery (ISMICS) 2005.

Authors:  Keith Allen; Davy Cheng; William Cohn; Mark Connolly; James Edgerton; Volkmar Falk; Janet Martin; Toshiya Ohtsuka; Richard Vitali
Journal:  Innovations (Phila)       Date:  2005

3.  Long-term outcomes of endoscopic vein harvesting after coronary artery bypass grafting.

Authors:  Lawrence J Dacey; John H Braxton; Robert S Kramer; Joseph D Schmoker; David C Charlesworth; Robert E Helm; Carmine Frumiento; Gerald L Sardella; Robert A Clough; Stephan R Jones; David J Malenka; Elaine M Olmstead; Cathy S Ross; Gerald T O'Connor; Donald S Likosky
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2011-01-03       Impact factor: 29.690

4.  Recommended standards for reports dealing with lower extremity ischemia: revised version.

Authors:  R B Rutherford; J D Baker; C Ernst; K W Johnston; J M Porter; S Ahn; D N Jones
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 4.268

5.  Endoscopic versus open saphenous vein harvest for femoral to below the knee arterial bypass using saphenous vein graft.

Authors:  Leo M Gazoni; Rebecca Carty; John Skinner; Kenneth J Cherry; Nancy L Harthun; Irving L Kron; Curtis G Tribble; John A Kern
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 4.268

6.  Reduction in wound morbidity rates following endoscopic saphenous vein harvest.

Authors:  K A Illig; J M Rhodes; Y Sternbach; C K Shortell; M G Davies; R M Green
Journal:  Ann Vasc Surg       Date:  2001-01       Impact factor: 1.466

7.  Wound complications of autogenous subcutaneous infrainguinal arterial bypass surgery: predisposing factors and management.

Authors:  M Wengrovitz; R G Atnip; R R Gifford; M M Neumyer; D F Heitjan; B L Thiele
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  1990-01       Impact factor: 4.268

8.  Endoscopic vein harvest: advantages and limitations.

Authors:  Pramod Bonde; Alastair N J Graham; Simon W MacGowan
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 4.330

9.  Femoral-popliteal bypass with endoscopically harvested saphenous vein in patients with TASC D disease of the superficial femoral artery.

Authors:  George L Hines; Reese A Wain; Joann Montecalvo; Martin Feuerman
Journal:  Ann Vasc Surg       Date:  2009-11-04       Impact factor: 1.466

10.  Evaluation of endoscopic vein extraction on structural and functional viability of saphenous vein endothelium.

Authors:  Bader E Hussaini; Xiu-Gui Lu; J Alan Wolfe; Hemant S Thatte
Journal:  J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2011-06-10       Impact factor: 1.637

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.