Sikandar Z Khan1, Mariel Rivero2, Brian McCraith3, Linda M Harris1, Maciej L Dryjski1, Hasan H Dosluoglu4. 1. Division of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, SUNY at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY. 2. Division of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, SUNY at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY; VA Western New York Healthcare System, Buffalo, NY. 3. VA Western New York Healthcare System, Buffalo, NY. 4. Division of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, SUNY at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY; VA Western New York Healthcare System, Buffalo, NY. Electronic address: dosluoglu@yahoo.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Although endoscopic vein harvest (EVH) has been reported to reduce the morbidity and length of stay compared with open vein harvest (OVH) for infrainguinal bypass procedures, there have been concerns about decreased graft patency and increased rates of reinterventions with EVH compared with OVH. We started using EVH in 2008, and currently it is our preferred approach. The goal of this study was to see if EVH is comparable to OVH in terms of graft patency and limb salvage and associated with fewer wound complications. METHODS: The study included 153 patients undergoing 171 elective lower extremity bypass procedures with single-piece autologous great saphenous vein from June 1, 2001, to December 31, 2014. Patients were observed postoperatively clinically and with duplex ultrasound evaluation. Patency, limb salvage rates, and postoperative complications were compared between OVH and EVH. RESULTS: There were 78 patients who had 88 EVH conduits and 75 patients who had 83 OVH conduits; 78.2% of the EVH group and 80% of the OVH group had critical limb ischemia (P = .237). Comorbidities were similar, but the EVH group had a significantly higher number of patients receiving antiplatelet drugs, enteric-coated acetylsalicylic acid (94.9% vs 70.7%; P < .001), and clopidogrel (62.8% vs 44%; P = .02), whereas the OVH group had more patients receiving warfarin anticoagulation (33.3% vs 20.5%; P = .073). Mean vein diameter was not signifciantly different (EVH, 3.2 ± 0.7 mm; OVH, 3.2 ± 0.8 mm; P = .598). Wound complication rates were significantly higher in the OVH group (EVH, 13.6%; OVH, 43.4%; P < .001), with 4.5% of patients in the EVH group and 18.1% of patients in the OVH group requiring débridement for wound complications (P = .005). Mean length of stay was shorter in the EVH group (EVH, 7.5 ± 6.4 days; OVH, 9.6 ± 11.0 days; P = .126). Early and late patency rates (EVH vs OVH 12- and 60-month primary patency, 73% ± 5% and 64% ± 6% vs 72% ± 5% and 56% ± 7 [P = .785]; assisted primary patency, 81% ± 5% and 77% ± 5% vs 81% ± 5% and 70% ± 6% [P = .731]; secondary patency, 87% ± 4% and 85% ± 4% vs 82% ± 4% and 73% ± 6% [P = .193]) and limb salvage rates (critical limb ischemia only, 12 and 60 months, 94% ± 3% and 81% ± 7% vs 83% ± 5% and 81% ± 5% [P = .400]) were similar between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: In experienced hands, EVH is associated with a significant decrease in wound complications with similar graft patency, reintervention rates, and limb salvage. Published by Elsevier Inc.
OBJECTIVE: Although endoscopic vein harvest (EVH) has been reported to reduce the morbidity and length of stay compared with open vein harvest (OVH) for infrainguinal bypass procedures, there have been concerns about decreased graft patency and increased rates of reinterventions with EVH compared with OVH. We started using EVH in 2008, and currently it is our preferred approach. The goal of this study was to see if EVH is comparable to OVH in terms of graft patency and limb salvage and associated with fewer wound complications. METHODS: The study included 153 patients undergoing 171 elective lower extremity bypass procedures with single-piece autologous great saphenous vein from June 1, 2001, to December 31, 2014. Patients were observed postoperatively clinically and with duplex ultrasound evaluation. Patency, limb salvage rates, and postoperative complications were compared between OVH and EVH. RESULTS: There were 78 patients who had 88 EVH conduits and 75 patients who had 83 OVH conduits; 78.2% of the EVH group and 80% of the OVH group had critical limb ischemia (P = .237). Comorbidities were similar, but the EVH group had a significantly higher number of patients receiving antiplatelet drugs, enteric-coated acetylsalicylic acid (94.9% vs 70.7%; P < .001), and clopidogrel (62.8% vs 44%; P = .02), whereas the OVH group had more patients receiving warfarin anticoagulation (33.3% vs 20.5%; P = .073). Mean vein diameter was not signifciantly different (EVH, 3.2 ± 0.7 mm; OVH, 3.2 ± 0.8 mm; P = .598). Wound complication rates were significantly higher in the OVH group (EVH, 13.6%; OVH, 43.4%; P < .001), with 4.5% of patients in the EVH group and 18.1% of patients in the OVH group requiring débridement for wound complications (P = .005). Mean length of stay was shorter in the EVH group (EVH, 7.5 ± 6.4 days; OVH, 9.6 ± 11.0 days; P = .126). Early and late patency rates (EVH vs OVH 12- and 60-month primary patency, 73% ± 5% and 64% ± 6% vs 72% ± 5% and 56% ± 7 [P = .785]; assisted primary patency, 81% ± 5% and 77% ± 5% vs 81% ± 5% and 70% ± 6% [P = .731]; secondary patency, 87% ± 4% and 85% ± 4% vs 82% ± 4% and 73% ± 6% [P = .193]) and limb salvage rates (critical limb ischemia only, 12 and 60 months, 94% ± 3% and 81% ± 7% vs 83% ± 5% and 81% ± 5% [P = .400]) were similar between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: In experienced hands, EVH is associated with a significant decrease in wound complications with similar graft patency, reintervention rates, and limb salvage. Published by Elsevier Inc.