Quiñones-Baldrich W J, Colburn M D, Ahn S S, Gelabert H A, Moore W S
Section of Vascular Surgery, UCLA School of Medicine 90024-6904.
Am J Surg. 1993 Aug;166(2):117-23; discussion 123. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9610(05)81041-4.
Forty-six bypass grafts to tibial arteries distal to the ankle were performed in 35 patients for salvage of extremities threatened by gangrene or nonhealing ulcers (grade III, category 5) or ischemic rest pain (grade II, category 4). Most patients (80%) were diabetic, with severely calcified arteries, whom previously we would have considered as candidates for primary amputation. All reconstructions were performed with autologous saphenous vein. Inflow was from the common femoral artery in 5 (11%), the popliteal artery in 25 (54%), or the mid-tibial arteries in 16 (35%). Life-table analysis was used to calculate primary patency and limb salvage. Results were analyzed according to origin of inflow, outflow, or configuration of the conduit (in situ saphenous vein, n = 29 [63%], reversed saphenous vein, n = 11 [24%], or nonreversed saphenous vein, n = 6 [13%]). Overall cumulative primary graft patency at 2 years for all grafts was 72%, and the cumulative limb salvage rate was 89% for the same interval. No significant differences were seen in comparing grafts originating from the femoral or popliteal level with those arising from the tibial arteries. No significant differences were noted in graft patency or limb salvage among grafts with a posterior tibial, dorsalis pedis, or plantar artery outflow. No significant difference was noted between in situ saphenous vein grafts and reversed saphenous vein grafts. A significant decreased primary patency was noted for grafts performed with nonreversed, translocated saphenous vein. We conclude that bypass grafts to the ankle or foot vessels are beneficial and should be considered for limb salvage in extremities with gangrene, ischemic ulceration, or ischemic rest pain. In our experience, in situ saphenous vein grafts or reversed saphenous vein grafts performed similarly, whereas nonreversed saphenous vein grafts have a poorer prognosis. Vessel wall calcification requires a modification in technique for performance of these grafts but did not affect long-term performance or limb salvage, and thus should not be considered a contraindication to vascular reconstruction. The operative microscope was used in 61% (28 of 46) of these cases and found useful in creating these delicate anastomoses. Additional follow-up is needed to document the long-term results of these very distal reconstructions.
对35例患者的46条踝部远端胫动脉进行了搭桥移植手术,以挽救因坏疽或不愈合溃疡(III级,5类)或缺血性静息痛(II级,4类)而受到威胁的肢体。大多数患者(80%)患有糖尿病,动脉严重钙化,以前我们会认为这些患者是一期截肢的候选者。所有重建均采用自体大隐静脉进行。流入血管为股总动脉的有5例(11%),腘动脉的有25例(54%),胫中动脉的有16例(35%)。采用寿命表分析法计算移植血管的初期通畅率和肢体挽救率。根据流入血管的起源、流出血管或移植管道的形态(原位大隐静脉,n = 29 [63%];翻转大隐静脉,n = 11 [24%];或未翻转大隐静脉,n = 6 [13%])对结果进行分析。所有移植血管在2年时的总体累积初期通畅率为72%,同一时间段的累积肢体挽救率为89%。比较源自股动脉或腘动脉水平的移植血管与源自胫动脉的移植血管,未发现显著差异。在以胫后动脉、足背动脉或足底动脉为流出血管的移植血管中,移植血管通畅率或肢体挽救率方面未发现显著差异。原位大隐静脉移植血管与翻转大隐静脉移植血管之间未发现显著差异。采用未翻转、移位的大隐静脉进行的移植血管,其初期通畅率显著降低。我们得出结论,对踝部或足部血管进行搭桥移植是有益的,对于患有坏疽、缺血性溃疡或缺血性静息痛的肢体,应考虑进行搭桥移植以挽救肢体。根据我们的经验,原位大隐静脉移植或翻转大隐静脉移植的效果相似,而未翻转大隐静脉移植的预后较差。血管壁钙化需要对这些移植手术的技术进行改进,但并不影响长期效果或肢体挽救,因此不应被视为血管重建的禁忌证。在这些病例中,61%(46例中的28例)使用了手术显微镜,发现其有助于进行这些精细的吻合。需要进一步随访以记录这些极远端重建手术的长期结果。