Endoscopic vein harvest does not negatively affect patency of great saphenous vein lower extremity bypass

How I do it: Endoscope-assisted in situ arterial reconstruction of the lower limb

Arterial reconstruction with the great saphenous vein is a frequently performed vascular surgery technique for revascularization of chronic limb threatening ischemia. Surgeon variations of the procedure are common and aim to balance patency, limb salvage, complications, hospital resources, and technical feasibility. We describe a minimally invasive revascularization option using endoscope assistance for in situ great saphenous vein-arterial bypass to treat infrainguinal occlusive disease. We highlight patient selection, operating room setup, instrument details, and procedure strategies that facilitate the use of this technique. The development and refinement of minimally invasive techniques for lower extremity arterial bypass are critical to reduce wound complications and improve limb salvage outcomes in patients.

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.

"In Vitro" Evaluation of Energy-Based Sealing of Graft Side Branches in Bypass Surgery

INTRODUCTION

Our objective was to compare the in vitro efficacy of electrothermal bipolar [EB] vessel sealing and ultrasonic harmonic scalpel [HS] versus mechanical interruption, with conventional ties or surgical clips (SC), in sealing saphenous vein (SV) collaterals, during its eventual preparation for bypass surgery.

METHODS

Experimental in vitro study on 30 segments of SV. Each fragment included two collaterals at least 2 mm in diameter. One of them was sealed by ligation with 3/0 silk ties (control) and the other one with EB (n = 10), HS (n = 10) or medium-6 mm SC (n = 10). After incorporation in a closed circuit with pulsatile flow, the pressure was progressively increased until causing rupture. Collateral diameter, burst pressure, leak point, and histological study were recorded.

RESULTS

Burst pressure was higher for SC (1320.20 ± 373.847 mmHg) as compared with EB (942.2 ± 344.9 mmHg, p = 0.065), and especially with HS (637.00 ± 320.61 mmHg, p = 0.0001). No statistically significant difference between EB and HS was found, and bursting always happened at supraphysiological pressures. The leak point for HS was always detected in the sealing zone (10/10), while for EB and SC, it occurred in the sealing zone only in 6/10(60%) and 4/10(40%), respectively (p = 0.015).

CONCLUSIONS

Energy delivery devices showed similar efficacy and safety in sealing of SV side branches. Although bursting pressure was lower than with tie ligature or SC, non-inferiority efficacy was shown at the range of physiological pressures in both, EB and HS. Due to their speed and easy handling, they may be useful in the preparation of the venous graft during revascularization surgery. However, remaining questions about healing process, potential spread of tissue damage and sealing durability, will require further analysis.

Lower Extremity Bypass

The original description of the lower extremity bypass (LEB) provided surgeons with a reliable method of limb revascularization. The tenets of the operation have formed the foundation for the advances of surgical care. A careful evaluation of the chronic limb-threatening ischemia patient due to the numerous comorbid conditions is paramount to obtain the best possible outcomes. Use of all adjuncts including judicious target vessels control, completion imaging, and vein harvesting techniques to ensure optimal outcomes because a functioning LEB remains a key to successful limb salvage.

Correlations between ultrasound, tomographic, and intraoperative measurements of the great saphenous vein used as an arterial graft

Background

The great saphenous vein is the major superficial vein of the lower limb, and also the most often used as arterial graft material for lower limb revascularization. Prior knowledge of the quality of the vein can guide choice of therapeutic strategy, avoiding surgery that is doomed to failure. Discrepancies between intraoperative findings of the quality of the great saphenous vein and imaging tests are also frequently observed.

Objectives

To evaluate the diameter of the great saphenous vein using two imaging methods (Duplex Ultrasound and Computed Tomography) and the gold-standard (intraoperative direct measurement of the vein), comparing the results.

Methods

Prospective, observational study of data obtained during routine medical procedures performed by the Vascular Surgery team.

Results

41 patients were evaluated, with a 12-month follow-up. 27 (65.85%) were male and mean age was 65.37 years. 19 (46.34%) patients had femoropopliteal grafts and 22 (53.66%) had distal grafts. Preoperative saphenous vein internal diameters measured with the patient supine were on average 16.4% smaller on CT and 33.8% smaller on US than the external diameters measured after intraoperative hydrostatic dilatation. There were no statistical differences in measurements when sex, weight, and height were considered.

Conclusions

Saphenous vein diameters were underestimated by preoperative US and CT scans when compared to intraoperative measurements. Thus, in patients undergoing graft planning for revascularization, the choice of conduit should take this data into consideration, so that use of the saphenous vein is not ruled out unnecessarily during planning.

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 clinical application of microincision vein harvesting of the great saphenous vein in coronary artery bypass grafting

BACKGROUND

The present study aimed to summarize the clinical application of microincision vein harvesting (MVH) of the great saphenous vein in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG).

METHODS

From July 2014 to October 2017, 160 patients underwent coronary artery bypass grafting. Among them, 80 patients received MVH of the great saphenous vein, and 80 received open venous harvesting (OVH). The results of the sampling operation, complications during hospitalization, and the long-term patency of the great saphenous vein were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

All the patients in both groups received successful operations. The difference in the length of the veins obtained and the injury of the veins was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). The difference in the long-term patency rate of the graft vessels between the two groups was not statistically significant. The in-hospital mortality rate was the same in both groups. The MVH group had noticeable advantages over the OVH group in terms of the vein collection times, the incision length, and the complications experienced when performing the leg incisions (P < 0.01). The time relating to the patients' observed early out-of-bed activity was significantly longer in the MVH group. Furthermore, the patients' hospitalization length was significantly shorter in the MVH group compared to the OVH group (P < 0.05). The MVH group had significant advantages in pain score and patient satisfaction, and this difference was also statistically significant (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The MVH procedure met the requirements of CABG in vein grafting. When compared with OVH, MVH can significantly reduce leg incision complications and improve patients' overall satisfaction with their hospital experience.

Major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event and patients' quality of life after endoscopic vein harvesting as compared with open vein harvest (MAQEH): a pilot study

Background

This is a prospective, comparative, pilot and follow-up (2-year postoperatively) study in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery where the long saphenous vein was harvested either by the endoscopic vein harvest (EVH) technique or open vein harvest (OVH) technique. Quality of life (QOL) and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) were assessed.

Methods

Alive patients who were initially part of a pilot study when EVH was introduced in our institution were included (n=48 EVH, n=49 OVH). Patients were sent a QOL questionnaire (SF12v2; 12-item medical outcomes study short form health survey version 2.0), and their cardiologist and general practitioner were contacted to assess MACCE.

Results

Median follow-up was 32 and 33 months, respectively. Three patients died (2 EVH, 1 OVH). Of the remaining 97 patients who were sent a questionnaire, 76% patients returned the form. More patients from the EVH group returned the QOL questionnaire (82% vs 71%). Time taken to return to normal daily activities was much shorter in EVH (median 6 (2–30) weeks) compared with OVH (median 9 (2–50) weeks) (P<0.05). QOL questionnaire revealed significant difference in physical score at follow-up: 45.3 (10.2) for EVH group and 40.7 (11.0) for OVH group (P<0.05). There was no difference in mental scores (46.9 (10.5) vs 49.2 (9.1), P=0.4). There were no significant differences in MACCEs including death between the two groups (12.2% vs 13.9%, P=0.5).

Conclusion

EVH patients returned to normal daily activities faster than OVH patients and experienced better physical QOL even after 2 years postoperatively with no increase in MACCE during follow-up.