These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Comparison of reversed and in situ saphenous vein grafts for infragenicular bypass: experience of two surgeons.
    Author: Sasajima T, Kubo Y, Kokubo M, Izumi Y, Inaba M.
    Journal: Cardiovasc Surg; 1993 Feb; 1(1):38-43. PubMed ID: 8075994.
    Abstract:
    A series of 241 consecutive autogenous vein bypasses for chronic lower-limb ischaemia performed by two surgeons since 1980 was reviewed. After 1985, in situ vein bypass was employed preferentially and was compared with reversed vein bypass. The two groups of patients had similar risk factors, indications and outflow. Of the 241 bypasses, 157 were to the below-knee popliteal artery and 84 to infrapopliteal arteries. The utilization rates of a single ipsilateral saphenous vein were 57.5% for reversed and 71.9% for in situ vein bypass. However, in situ vein bypass was impossible in 43 procedures and these were changed to the reversed operation with contralateral vein. The primary 5-year patency rates of reversed and in situ vein bypass grafts to the popliteal artery were 82.5 versus 74.5%, and the primary 4-year patency rates for infrapopliteal bypass 68.5 versus 80.0%. The respective secondary patency rates were 94.2 versus 92.1% and 85.7 versus 91.1%. The main cause of graft failure was vein graft stenosis (reversed vein bypass, 13.0%; in situ, 11.1%), which usually occurred in the first 2 years after surgery. Of 23 grafts revised for stenosis, 21 were salvaged and restenosis rarely occurred. Both reversed and in situ vein bypass grafts were equally effective, but careful surveillance for 2 years and aggressive revision were extremely important after either type of reconstruction.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]