Oderich Gustavo S, Panneton Jean M, Yagubyan Marineh, Bower Thomas C, Hofer Jan, Noel Audra A, Sullivan Timothy, Kalra Manju, Cherry Kenneth J, Gloviczki Peter
Division of Vascular Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Ann Vasc Surg. 2005 Jan;19(1):49-55. doi: 10.1007/s10016-004-0152-0.
Distal vein cuff interposition is often added to prosthetic infragenicular arterial reconstruction in an attempt to improve hemodynamics and patency rates. The purpose of this study was to compare the outcome of a precuffed expanded polytetrafluroethylene (ePTFE) graft with a vein-cuffed ePTFE graft for infragenicular bypass. We reviewed the clinical outcome of 77 patients with critical limb ischemia without available autologous vein conduits who underwent arterial reconstruction of 80 limbs to below-knee popliteal or tibioperoneal vessels using either ePTFE precuffed graft (precuffed group, 38 patients 40 limbs) or ePTFE vein-cuffed graft (vein-cuffed group, 39 patient, 40 limbs). Precuffed group patients were enrolled in a prospective cohort study. Vein-cuffed group patients consisted of consecutive case-matched patients operated on during the same study period. End points were primary graft patency and limb salvage rates. There were 42 males and 35 females with a mean age of 73.4 years (range, 44-92 years). Both groups were matched to demographics, risk factors for atherosclerosis, previous ipsilateral reconstruction, and location of the distal anastomosis. Proximal anastomosis was to the common (n = 68) or superficial (n = 12) femoral arteries. Distal anastomosis was to the below-knee popliteal (n = 28), anterior tibial (n = 12), posterior tibial (n = 15) and peroneal (n = 25) arteries. Operative mortality was 1.3%. Graft patency at dismissal was 90% and 95% in the precuffed and vein-cuffed groups, respectively. The mean follow-up was 25.7 months (range, 2.4-61 months). Primary patency rates at 1 and 3 years were 70% and 57% in the precuffed group, and 78% and 54% in the vein-cuffed group (p = 0.32). Limb salvage rates at 1 and 3 years were 97% and 70% in the precuffed group, and 95% and 81% in the vein-cuffed group (p = 0.49). Overall patient survival at 1 and 3 years was 81 % and 57%, respectively. In this case-control study, results of precuffed ePTFE graft were similar to those obtained with vein-cuffed ePTFE grafts. The precuffed ePTFE graft is an adequate alternative conduit for infragenicular arterial reconstruction in patients with critical limb ischemia and no available autologous veins.
在人工膝下动脉重建术中,常加用远侧静脉套入术,以改善血流动力学和提高通畅率。本研究旨在比较预套囊的膨体聚四氟乙烯(ePTFE)移植物与静脉套囊的ePTFE移植物用于膝下旁路移植的效果。我们回顾了77例严重肢体缺血且无自体静脉可用的患者的临床结果,这些患者接受了80条肢体的动脉重建,使用ePTFE预套囊移植物(预套囊组,38例患者40条肢体)或ePTFE静脉套囊移植物(静脉套囊组,39例患者40条肢体)重建至膝下腘动脉或胫腓血管。预套囊组患者纳入前瞻性队列研究。静脉套囊组患者为同一研究期间连续的病例匹配患者。终点指标为移植物原发性通畅率和肢体挽救率。患者共42例男性和35例女性,平均年龄73.4岁(范围44 - 92岁)。两组在人口统计学、动脉粥样硬化危险因素、既往同侧重建情况以及远侧吻合口位置方面相匹配。近侧吻合口位于股总动脉(n = 68)或股浅动脉(n = 12)。远侧吻合口位于膝下腘动脉(n = 28)、胫前动脉(n = 12)、胫后动脉(n = 15)和腓动脉(n = 25)。手术死亡率为1.3%。出院时移植物通畅率在预套囊组和静脉套囊组分别为90%和95%。平均随访时间为25.7个月(范围2.4 - 61个月)。预套囊组1年和3年的原发性通畅率分别为70%和57%,静脉套囊组分别为78%和54%(p = 0.32)。预套囊组1年和3年的肢体挽救率分别为97%和70%,静脉套囊组分别为95%和81%(p = 0.49)。1年和3年时患者总体生存率分别为81%和57%。在本病例对照研究中,预套囊ePTFE移植物的结果与静脉套囊ePTFE移植物相似。对于严重肢体缺血且无自体静脉可用的患者,预套囊ePTFE移植物是膝下动脉重建的一种合适替代管道。