Rendl K H
Abteilung für Gefässchirurgie Landeskrankenanstalten Salzburg.
Vasa Suppl. 1991;31:1-48.
In a retrospective study we compared the results of 96 reversed (group I) and of 45 in-situ (group II) femoropopliteal infragenual venous bypasses. All reconstructions were done without TEA of the connecting vessels and without pre-, intra- or postoperative in - or outflow manipulations. The outflow tract (state of the crural arteries) in both groups was similar (p = 0.1). The states of ischemia were different (more cases of limb threatening ischemia in group II, 0.001 less than p less than 0.005). In opposition to most publications the cumulative patency rates were statistically different (88.8%/68.4% after 3 months, 73.1%/25.4% after 2 years, p less than 0.005). Also limited function rates-exclusion of all cases with reocclusion within 3 months respectively all operations with severe faults in indication or technique of operation, showed worse results for the group II (p less than 0.05). Most early reocclusions of in-situ-bypass were caused by leaks of the bypass vein or residual valves. In an experimental study we could demonstrate, that the conventional methods of valve-destruction are followed by an extensive trauma of the venous wall or by an incomplete rupture of the valves. After elimination of the valvular function their afibrinolytic sinus lie free in the vein lumen. We invented and tested experimentally and clinically a new valve-destroying instrument, the Elektrovalvulectome, which does not rupture the valves, but does excise them in toto. Additionally the cutting head of the instrument can be changed in situ and so adapted to the different diameters of the venous conduit. The results were excellent. We found from own hemodynamic measurements and from the literature, that the numerous theoretical advantages of the in situ venous bypass, except the better hemodynamics, are without practical relevance. From our own experiences and those of the literature we must conclude: 1. The in-situ venous bypass is a good method for femorocrural reconstructions. 2. If the distal anastomosis lies in the popliteal artery, we prefer the free orthograd venous bypass. 3. The valves should not be ruptured or incised, but excised in toto.
在一项回顾性研究中,我们比较了96例逆行(I组)和45例原位(II组)股腘膝下静脉旁路移植术的结果。所有重建均未对连接血管进行端端吻合,且未进行术前、术中或术后的流入或流出道操作。两组的流出道(小腿动脉状态)相似(p = 0.1)。缺血状态不同(II组肢体威胁性缺血的病例更多,0.001 < p < 0.005)。与大多数出版物相反,累积通畅率在统计学上存在差异(3个月后为88.8%/68.4%,2年后为73.1%/25.4%,p < 0.005)。同样,有限功能率——排除3个月内再次闭塞的所有病例以及所有在手术指征或技术方面存在严重缺陷的手术,II组的结果更差(p < 0.05)。原位旁路移植术的大多数早期再闭塞是由旁路静脉渗漏或残留瓣膜引起的。在一项实验研究中,我们能够证明,传统的瓣膜破坏方法会导致静脉壁广泛损伤或瓣膜不完全破裂。消除瓣膜功能后,其无纤维蛋白溶解的窦腔游离于静脉腔内。我们发明并在实验和临床中测试了一种新的瓣膜破坏器械——电动瓣膜切除器,它不会使瓣膜破裂,而是将其整体切除。此外,该器械的切割头可在原位更换,从而适应不同直径的静脉管道。结果非常好。我们从自身的血流动力学测量以及文献中发现,原位静脉旁路移植术除了更好的血流动力学外,众多理论上的优势并无实际意义。根据我们自己的经验以及文献中的经验,我们必须得出以下结论:1. 原位静脉旁路移植术是股腘重建的一种好方法。2. 如果远端吻合位于腘动脉,我们更倾向于游离顺行静脉旁路移植术。3. 瓣膜不应破裂或切开,而应整体切除。