Outcomes following ipsilateral great saphenous vein bypass for lower extremity arterial injuries.

Autologous vein bypass Extremity arterial trauma Saphenous vein bypass

Journal

Injury
ISSN: 1879-0267
Titre abrégé: Injury
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 0226040

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
22 Mar 2023
Historique:
received: 12 12 2022
revised: 15 02 2023
accepted: 20 03 2023
entrez: 27 3 2023
pubmed: 28 3 2023
medline: 28 3 2023
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Use of autologous great saphenous vein (GSV) grafts for repair of extremity arterial injuries is well established. Contralateral great saphenous vein (cGSV) is traditionally used in the setting of lower extremity vascular injury given the risk of occult ipsilateral superficial and deep venous injury. We evaluated outcomes of ipsilateral GSV (iGSV) bypass in patients with lower extremity vascular trauma. Patient records at an ACS verified Level I urban trauma center between 2001 and 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients who sustained lower extremity arterial injuries managed with autologous GSV bypass were included. Propensity-matched analysis compared the iGSV and cGSV groups. Primary graft patency was assessed via Kaplan-Meier analysis at 1-year and 3-years following the index operation. A total of 76 patients underwent autologous GSV bypass for lower extremity vascular injuries. 61 cases (80%) were secondary to penetrating trauma, and 15 patients (20%) underwent repair with iGSV bypass. Arteries injured in the iGSV group included popliteal (33.3%), common femoral (6.7%), superficial femoral (33.3%), and tibial (26.7%), while those in the cGSV group included common femoral (3.3%), superficial femoral (54.1%), and popliteal (42.6%). Reasons for using iGSV included trauma to the contralateral leg (26.7%), relative accessibility (33.3%), and other/unknown (40%). On unadjusted analysis, iGSV patients had a higher rate of 1-year amputation than cGSV patients (20% vs. 4.9%), but this was not statistically significant (P = 0.09). Propensity matched analysis also found no significant difference in 1-year major amputation (8.3% vs. 4.8%, P = 0.99). Regarding ambulatory status, iGSV patients had similar rates of independent ambulation (33.3% vs. 38.1%), need for assistive devices (58.3% vs. 57.1%), and use of a wheelchair (8.3% vs. 4.8%) compared cGSV patients at subsequent follow-up (P = 0.90). Kaplan-Meier analysis of bypass grafts revealed comparable primary patency rates for iGSV versus cGSV bypasses at 1-year (84% vs. 91%) and 3-years post-intervention (83% vs. 90%, P = 0.364). Ipsilateral GSV may be used as a durable conduit for bypass in cases of lower extremity arterial trauma where use of contralateral GSV is not feasible, with comparable long-term primary graft patency rates and ambulatory status.

Identifiants

pubmed: 36973136
pii: S0020-1383(23)00286-3
doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2023.03.030
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Auteurs

Shamsh P Shaikh (SP)

Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Boston Medical Center, Boston University Chobanian and Avedisian School of Medicine, Boston, MA, United States.

Maha H Haqqani (MH)

Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Boston Medical Center, Boston University Chobanian and Avedisian School of Medicine, Boston, MA, United States.

Daniel B Alfson (DB)

Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Boston Medical Center, Boston University Chobanian and Avedisian School of Medicine, Boston, MA, United States.

Alexandra Forsyth (A)

Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Boston Medical Center, Boston University Chobanian and Avedisian School of Medicine, Boston, MA, United States.

Fernando Brea (F)

Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Boston Medical Center, Boston University Chobanian and Avedisian School of Medicine, Boston, MA, United States.

Aaron Richman (A)

Division of Trauma, Acute Care Surgery and Surgical Critical Care, Boston Medical Center, Boston University Chobanian and Avedisian School of Medicine, 840 Harrison Ave, Dowling 2 South, Suite 2509, Boston, MA, 02118, United States.

Jeffrey J Siracuse (JJ)

Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Boston Medical Center, Boston University Chobanian and Avedisian School of Medicine, Boston, MA, United States.

Denis Rybin (D)

Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Boston Medical Center, Boston University Chobanian and Avedisian School of Medicine, Boston, MA, United States.

Robert T Eberhardt (RT)

Evans Department of Medicine and Whitaker Cardiovascular Institute, Boston University Chobanian and Avedisian School of Medicine, Boston, MA, United States.

Alik Farber (A)

Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Boston Medical Center, Boston University Chobanian and Avedisian School of Medicine, Boston, MA, United States.

Tejal S Brahmbhatt (TS)

Division of Trauma, Acute Care Surgery and Surgical Critical Care, Boston Medical Center, Boston University Chobanian and Avedisian School of Medicine, 840 Harrison Ave, Dowling 2 South, Suite 2509, Boston, MA, 02118, United States. Electronic address: tejal.brahmbhatt@bmc.org.

Classifications MeSH