Comparison of Bypass with Endoscopically Harvested Internal Saphenous Vein versus Bypass with Surgically Harvested Internal Saphenous Vein for Lower Limb Arterial Disease

Long-term outcomes of great saphenous vein harvest techniques for infrainguinal arterial bypass in a Medicare-matched registry database

OBJECTIVE

Long-term outcomes for harvesting techniques for great saphenous vein (GSV) and its impact on the outcomes of infrainguinal arterial bypass remains largely unknown. Endoscopic GSV harvesting (EVH) has emerged as a less invasive alternative to conventional open techniques. Using the Vascular Quality initiative Vascular Implant Surveillance & Interventional Outcomes Network (VQI-VISION) database, we compared the long-term outcomes of infrainguinal arterial bypass using open and endoscopic GSV harvest techniques.

METHODS

Patients who underwent infrainguinal GSV bypass between 2010 and 2019 were identified in the VQI-VISION Medicare linked database. Long-term outcomes of major/minor amputations, and reinterventions up to 5 years of follow-up were compared between continuous incisions, skip incision, and EVH, with continuous incisions being the reference group. Secondary outcomes included 30- and 90-day readmission, in addition to surgical site infections and patency rates at 6 months to 2 years postoperatively. Survival analysis using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression hazard models were utilized to compare outcomes between groups. To adjust for multiple comparisons between the study groups, a P value of 2.5% was considered significant.

RESULTS

Among the 8915 patients included in the study, continuous and skip vein harvest techniques were used in 44.4% and 43.4% of cases each, whereas 12.3% underwent EVH. The utilization of EVH remained relatively stable at around 12% throughout the study period. Compared with GSV harvest using continuous incisions, EVH was associated with higher rates of reintervention at 1 year (46.5% vs 41.3%; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.22; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.06-1.41; P = .01]. However, no significant difference was observed between EVH and continuous incisions, and between skip and continuous incisions in terms of long-term reintervention or major and minor amputations on adjusted analysis. Compared with continuous incision vein harvest, both EVH and skip incisions were associated with lower surgical site infection rates within the first 6 months post-bypass (aHR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.35-0.82 and aHR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.53-0.87, respectively). Loss of primary, primary-assisted, and secondary patency was higher after EVH compared with continuous incision vein harvest. Among surgeons performing EVH, comparable long-term outcomes were observed regardless of low (<4 cases/year), medium (4-7 cases/year), or high procedural volumes (>7 cases/year).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite higher 1-year reintervention rates, EVH for infrainguinal arterial bypass is not associated with a significant difference in long-term reintervention or amputation rates compared with other harvesting techniques. These outcomes are not influenced by procedural volumes for EVH technique.

A framework for perioperative care for lower extremity vascular bypasses: A Consensus Statement by the Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS®) Society and Society for Vascular Surgery

The Society for Vascular Surgery and the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society formally collaborated and elected an international, multi-disciplinary panel of experts to review the literature and provide evidence-based suggestions for coordinated perioperative care for patients undergoing infrainguinal bypass surgery for peripheral artery disease. Structured around the ERAS core elements, 26 suggestions were made and organized into preadmission, preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative sections.

How to Prevent Surgical Site Infection in Vascular Surgery: A Review of the Evidence

BACKGROUND

This review aims to identify and review the current evidence for preventing postoperative surgical site infections in abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery or infrainguinal arterial surgery.

METHODS

Extended literature review of clinical trials that examined the prevention of postoperative surgical site infections in abdominal aortic aneurysm or infrainguinal arterial surgery. Searches were conducted on Ovid MEDLINE (1950 - 13 March 2020) using key terms for vascular surgery, surgical site infections and specific preventative techniques. Articles were included if they discussed a relationship between a preventative technique and surgical site infections in abdominal aortic aneurysm or infrainguinal arterial surgery. The GRADE guidelines were used to assess the quality of evidence.

RESULTS

21 techniques and 81 studies were included. Prophylactic antibiotics and negative pressure wound therapy have a high quality of evidence for the prevention of surgical site infections in abdominal aortic aneurysm or infrainguinal arterial surgery. A moderate quality evidence base was identified for gentamicin containing collagen implant (confined to high surgical site infection risk centers). Currently, there is a low or very low quality of evidence to suggest a reduction in the surgical site infection rate for combination therapy, glycaemic control, Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus screening and absorbable suture. Evidence suggests no beneficial effect for nutritional supplementation, chlorhexidine bath, hair removal therapy, Staphylococcus aureus nasal eradication, cyanoacrylate microsealant, silver grafts, rifampicin bonded grafts, triclosan coated suture and postoperative wound drains. Endoscopic saphenous vein harvest may reduce surgical site infection rate (very low quality of evidence) but may lower long-term patency. Autologous vein grafts may increase surgical site infections (very low quality of evidence) but may provide better long-term patency rates in above-knee infrainguinal bypass surgery. There was no identified evidence for perioperative normothermia, electrosurgical bipolar vessel sealer or Dermabond and Tegaderm for surgical site infection prevention in vascular surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic antibiotics and postoperative negative pressure wound therapy are effective in the prevention of postoperative surgical site infection in abdominal aortic aneurysm or infrainguinal arterial surgery. There exists a significant risk of bias in the literature for many preventative techniques and further studies are required to investigate the efficacy of gentamicin containing collagen implant, and specific combination therapies.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of saphenous vein harvesting and grafting for lower extremity arterial bypass

OBJECTIVE

In the present systematic review and meta-analysis, we compared the short- and long-term outcomes of different harvesting and grafting techniques in patients undergoing lower extremity arterial bypass.

METHODS

We searched multiple electronic databases (up to December 1, 2019) for comparative trials investigating different harvesting and bypass grafting techniques.

RESULTS

We identified a total of 37 studies for our review. Skip incision harvesting showed a similar high primary patency rate (Peto odds ratio [OR], 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83-1.04; P = .20) with continuous incision harvesting and comparable low wound complication rates (relative risk, 1.55; 95% CI, 0.91-2.66; P = .11) with endoscopic harvesting. In situ bypass grafting a long-term patency similar to that of reversed grafting (Peto OR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.75-1.37; P = .93). However, for femoropopliteal bypass, the reversed bypass grafting group had significantly lower 2-year (Peto OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.52-0.78; P < .001) and 5-year (Peto OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.50-0.98; P = .04) failure rates compared with the in situ bypass grafting group. For infrapopliteal bypass, the in situ bypass grafting group had significantly lower 1-year (Peto OR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.04-2.28; P = .03), 2-year (Peto OR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.15-2.02; P = .003), and 3-year (Peto OR, 2.14; 95% CI, 1.13-4.05; P = .02) failure rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Skip incision harvesting can be considered the first-line harvesting strategy. For patients undergoing femoropopliteal bypass, reversed bypass grafting seems to result in better long-term patency. In contrast, for those undergoing infrapopliteal bypass, in situ bypass grafting resulted in superior long-term patency.

The role of infragenicular spliced vein bypass surgery in patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia: single center long-term results

BACKGROUND

In patients requiring infrageniculate surgical revascularization a single-segment great saphenous vein (SS-GSV) is the optimal conduit. In the absence of a SS-GSV, the small saphenous vein and arm veins can also be used to obtain an all-autologous bypass. The aim of this study was to compare the long-term results of infrageniculate SS-GSV bypasses and spliced vein bypasses in patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI).

METHODS

A total of 308 consecutive CLTI patients who underwent a primary infragenicular, autologous bypass between January 2000 and December 2016 were included. The definition of a spliced vein bypass was a graft consisting of at least two venous segments.

RESULTS

A SS-GSV graft was used in 235 patients, and a spliced vein graft was used in 73 patients. Significantly more infrapopliteal bypasses were performed in the spliced vein group (P=0.024), and in this group the mean operation time was almost 60 minutes longer (P<0.001). The overall morbidity rate was 44%. The overall 30-day mortality was 3.2%, and overall in-hospital mortality was 4.9%. No significant differences were observed between the groups in mortality, overall morbidity or any specific complication. Comparing the SS-GSV group with the spliced vein group, no significant differences were observed between overall survival (53.2% vs. 45.7%), primary patency (55.5% vs. 53.2%), assisted primary patency (78.5% vs. 76.5%), secondary patency (87.9% vs. 90.6%) and limb salvage (83.3% vs. 82.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of infrageniculate spliced vein bypasses for the treatment of CLTI patients results in similar results compared with infrageniculate SS-GSV bypass grafts. A strict surveillance protocol in the first 2 years and a liberal reintervention strategy may result in excellent long-term patency rates.

Multidisciplinary Care for Critical Limb Ischemia: Current Gaps and Opportunities for Improvement

Critical limb ischemia (CLI), defined as ischemic rest pain or nonhealing ulceration due to arterial insufficiency, represents the most severe and limb-threatening manifestation of peripheral artery disease. A major challenge in the optimal treatment of CLI is that multiple specialties participate in the care of this complex patient population. As a result, the care of patients with CLI is often fragmented, and multidisciplinary societal guidelines have not focused specifically on the care of patients with CLI. Furthermore, multidisciplinary care has the potential to improve patient outcomes, as no single medical specialty addresses all the facets of care necessary to reduce cardiovascular and limb-related morbidity in this complex patient population. This review identifies current gaps in the multidisciplinary care of patients with CLI, with a goal toward increasing disease recognition and timely referral, defining important components of CLI treatment teams, establishing options for revascularization strategies, and identifying best practices for wound care post-revascularization.