Amouzeshi Ahmad, Teshnisi Mohamad Abbassi, Zirak Nahid, Shamloo Alireza Sepehri, Hoseinikhah Hamid, Alizadeh Behzad, Moeinipour Aliasghar
M.D., Assistant Professor, Department of Cardiac Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Birjand University of Medical Science, Birjand, Iran.
M.D., Associate Professor, Department of Cardiac Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Atherosclerosis Prevention Research Center, Imam Reza Hospital, Mashhad University of Medical Science, Mashhad, Iran.
Electron Physician. 2016 Jan 15;8(1):1693-700. doi: 10.19082/1693. eCollection 2016 Jan.
Harvesting of the greater saphenous vein is almost an inevitable part of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) operations, and it is done by two main techniques, i.e., conventional or open vein harvesting (OVH) and the minimally-invasive endoscopic vein harvesting (EVH). This study aimed to compare these two techniques in off-pump CABG procedures with respect to clinical and pathological outcomes.
This cohort study was conducted on CABG candidates during a one-year period from October 2013 through September 2014 in the Department of Cardiac Surgery at Mashhad University of Medical Sciences. Eighty-seven patients voluntarily underwent EVH, and another 86 patients matched for age, gender, and other cardiovascular risk factors were selected for OVH. They were followed up for six weeks, and the main outcome measures were infections of the wound, pain, duration of hospital stay, and the costs of hospitalization. Paired sample t-test, independent t-test, or their non-parametric equivalents and the chi-squared test were used by SPSS version 17.0 for data analysis.
The mean duration of time for vein harvesting was shorter in the EVH group (p < 0.001), and the pain score was lower (p = 0.04). No infections occurred at the site of the wound. The length of hospital stay was not significantly different for the two groups (OVH versus EVH: 8.5 ± 3.3 versus 8.4 ± 3.2 days; p-value: 0.08). Hospitalization costs were significantly higher in the EVH group (OVH versus EVH: 5.8 ± 4.7 versus 7.3 ± 2.0 million Tomman; p-value: 0.008), yet no difference was diagnosed with respect to endothelial damage in the vein grafts harvested by the EVH and OVH techniques.
EVH is considered as a minimally invasive and safe vein harvesting technique in our Center, and it can reduce the harvesting time and post-operative pain. In addition, its efficiency was similar to that of OVH.
大隐静脉采集几乎是冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)手术中不可避免的一部分,主要通过两种技术进行,即传统或开放静脉采集(OVH)和微创内镜静脉采集(EVH)。本研究旨在比较这两种技术在非体外循环CABG手术中的临床和病理结果。
本队列研究于2013年10月至2014年9月在马什哈德医科大学心脏外科对CABG候选患者进行。87例患者自愿接受EVH,另外86例年龄、性别和其他心血管危险因素相匹配的患者被选作OVH。对他们进行了六周的随访,主要观察指标为伤口感染、疼痛、住院时间和住院费用。使用SPSS 17.0版采用配对样本t检验、独立t检验或其非参数等效检验以及卡方检验进行数据分析。
EVH组静脉采集的平均时间较短(p < 0.001),疼痛评分较低(p = 0.04)。伤口部位未发生感染。两组的住院时间无显著差异(OVH组与EVH组:8.5±3.3天对8.4±3.2天;p值:0.08)。EVH组的住院费用显著更高(OVH组与EVH组:580±470万托曼对730±200万托曼;p值:0.008),然而,EVH和OVH技术采集的静脉移植物在内皮损伤方面未发现差异。
在我们中心,EVH被认为是一种微创且安全的静脉采集技术,它可以缩短采集时间和术后疼痛。此外,其效率与OVH相似。