Comparison of axillofemoral and aortofemoral bypass for aortoiliac occlusive disease.

PURPOSE

A comparison of aortofemoral bypass grafting (AOFBG) and axillofemoral bypass grafting (AXFBG) for occlusive disease performed by the same surgeons during a defined interval forms the basis for this report.

METHODS

Data regarding all patients who underwent AOFBG of AXFBG for lower-extremity ischemia caused by aortoiliac occlusive disease were prospectively entered into a computerized vascular registry. The decision to perform AOFBG rather than AXFBG was based on assessment of surgical risk and the surgeon's preference. This report describes results for surgical morbidity, mortality, patency, limb salvage, and patient survival for procedures performed from January 1988 through December 1993.

RESULTS

We performed 108 AXFBGs and 139 AOFBGs. AXFBG patients were older (mean age, 68 years compared with 58 years for AOFBG, p<0.001), more often had heart disease (84% compared with 38%, p<0.001), more often underwent surgery for limb-salvage indications (80% compared with 42%, p<0.001). No significant differences were found in operative mortality (AXFBG, 3.4%; AOFBG, <1.0%, p=NS), but major postoperative complications occurred more frequently after AOFBG (AXFBG, 9.2%; AOFBG, 19.4%; p<0.05). Follow-up ranged from 1 to 83 months (mean, 27 months). Five-year life-table primary patency, limb salvage, and survival rates were 74%, 89%, and 45% for AXFBG and 80%, 79%, and 72% for AOFBG, respectively. Although the patient survival rate was statistically lower with AXFBG, primary patency and limb salvage rates did not differ when compared with AOFBG.

CONCLUSION

When reserved for high-risk patients with limited life expectancy, the patency and limb salvage results of AXFBG are equivalent to those of AOFBG.