Literature DB >> 33442206

The back-approach technique of endoscopic saphenous vein harvesting in coronary artery bypass grafting.

Kiyoshi Tamura1, Toshiyuki Maruyama1, Shogo Sakurai1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: One of the concerns during endoscopic saphenous vein harvesting (EVH) in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is injury to the vein or its branches. The cutting edge of bipolar electrocautery scissors, used to divide the side branches of the saphenous vein, can cause vascular injury leading to reduced graft patency. We have developed a novel back-approach technique using a C-ring to divide the wide side branches of the saphenous vein during EVH. The aim of the study was to describe the technique and assess early outcomes of EVH using this technique. The back-approach technique is as follows: (a) insert the C-ring near the target branch, (b) push the C-ring over the proximal aspect of the target branch, (c) twist the C-ring forward to capture the target branch, and (d) cut the target branch by bipolar electrocautery.
METHODS: We investigated 169 patients, including 35 women (mean age 70.1 ± 8.9 years), who underwent CABG at our hospital, using a novel EVH technique. The patients were categorized as those who underwent EVH (EVH group, n = 44) or open vein harvesting (OVH) (OVH group, n = 125). This method involves the creation of a small incision (2 cm), sufficient saphenous vein dissection near the skin incision, adequate dissection to separate the vein from the surrounding tissues, and the back-approach technique with C-ring to divide the side branch of the saphenous vein. The primary endpoint was the graft patency rate, and the secondary endpoints were leg wound complications and length of hospitalization.
RESULTS: No significant intergroup difference was observed in early patency of saphenous vein graft patency (OVH vs. EVH = 94.7 vs. 95.6%, p = 0.763). The incidence of lower extremity wound lymphorrhea was significantly lesser (OVH: EVH = 16.0: 0.0%, p = 0.005) and the length of hospitalization was also significantly shorter in the EVH group (OVH vs. EVH = 24.2 ± 9.8 vs. 19.0 ± 5.3 days, p = 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: EVH, using the back-approach technique, showed satisfactory short-term results; therefore, this technique performed with C-ring might be effective for vein harvesting during EVH. © Indian Association of Cardiovascular-Thoracic Surgeons 2020.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Coronary artery bypass grafting; Endoscopic saphenous vein harvesting; Open saphenous vein harvesting; Saphenous vein graft

Year:  2020        PMID: 33442206      PMCID: PMC7778641          DOI: 10.1007/s12055-020-01063-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Indian J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg        ISSN: 0970-9134


  14 in total

1.  Endoscopic vein-graft harvesting: balancing the risk and benefits.

Authors:  Davy C H Cheng; Janet Martin; Francis D Ferdinand; John D Puskas; Anno Diegeler; Keith B Allen
Journal:  Innovations (Phila)       Date:  2010-03

2.  Quantification of thermal spread and burst pressure after endoscopic vessel harvesting: a comparison of 2 commercially available devices.

Authors:  Alvaro Rojas-Pena; Kelly L Koch; Holden D Heitner; Candice M Hall; Ingrid L Bergin; Keith E Cook
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2010-12-03       Impact factor: 5.209

3.  Assessing pain in critically ill sedated patients by using a behavioral pain scale.

Authors:  J F Payen; O Bru; J L Bosson; A Lagrasta; E Novel; I Deschaux; P Lavagne; C Jacquot
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 7.598

4.  Endoscopic versus direct vision for saphenous vein graft harvesting in coronary artery bypass surgery.

Authors:  N Ad; L Henry; S Hunt; S Holmes; N Burton; P Massimiano; J Rhee; A Rongione; A Speir; L Collazo
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino)       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 1.888

5.  Benefits of Endoscopic Vein Harvesting in Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting.

Authors:  Vincent J Kroeze; Ka Yan Lam; Albert H M van Straten; Saskia Houterman; Mohamed A Soliman-Hamad
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2019-06-08       Impact factor: 4.330

Review 6.  Is endoscopic long saphenous vein harvesting equivalent to open harvesting technique in terms of graft patency?

Authors:  Amer Harky; Damian Balmforth; Alex Shipolini; Rakesh Uppal
Journal:  Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg       Date:  2017-08-01

7.  The Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale: validity and reliability in adult intensive care unit patients.

Authors:  Curtis N Sessler; Mark S Gosnell; Mary Jo Grap; Gretchen M Brophy; Pam V O'Neal; Kimberly A Keane; Eljim P Tesoro; R K Elswick
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2002-11-15       Impact factor: 21.405

8.  Strategies to reduce intraluminal clot formation in endoscopically harvested saphenous veins.

Authors:  Emile N Brown; Zachary N Kon; Richard Tran; Nicholas S Burris; Junyen Gu; Patrick Laird; Philip S Brazio; Seeta Kallam; Kimberly Schwartz; Lisa Bechtel; Ashish Joshi; Shaosong Zhang; Robert S Poston
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2007-09-29       Impact factor: 5.209

9.  Saphenous vein conduits harvested by endoscopic technique exhibit structural and functional damage.

Authors:  Laki J Rousou; Kristin B Taylor; Xiu-Gui Lu; Nancy Healey; Michael D Crittenden; Shukri F Khuri; Hemant S Thatte
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 4.330

10.  Endoscopic vs open saphenous vein harvest for coronary artery bypass grafting: a prospective randomized trial.

Authors:  Jan Jesper Andreasen; Vytautas Nekrasas; Claus Dethlefsen
Journal:  Eur J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2008-05-27       Impact factor: 4.191

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.