Horvath K D, Gray D, Benton L, Hill J, Swanstrom L L
Department of Surgery, Oregon Health Sciences University, Legacy Health System, Portland, USA.
Am J Surg. 1998 May;175(5):391-5. doi: 10.1016/S0002-9610(98)00044-0.
The longest incision used in surgery is the standard incision for harvesting the greater saphenous vein for arterial grafting. This long incision is associated with significant pain and morbidity. We present a comparative study between two relatively less invasive techniques: the standard bridge technique (BT) and the endoscopic saphenous vein harvest (ESVH).
This is a prospective, nonrandomized, case-matched study of contemporaneous minimally invasive saphenous vein harvest in patients undergoing multiple vessel coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Data points include operative time, total wound length, length of vein harvested, intraoperative complications, conversions to open, injury to the graft, postoperative complications and hospital length of stay. Follow-up continued for 8 weeks postdischarge.
Within a 10-month period (July 1996 to May 1997), 60 saphenous vein harvests were performed, with 29 by BT and 31 by ESVH. Patient demographics were well matched, except for a larger number of patients with peripheral vascular disease in the ESVH group. ESVH only required 2.3 incisions versus 5 for the BT (P = 0.000001), whereas ESVH produced on average longer veins of 53.9 cm versus 47.7 cm for BT (P = 0.05). Harvest times were comparable in the two groups. However, mean vein preparation times, incision closure times, and total vein operative times for the BT were, respectively, 18.5 minutes, 35.1 minutes, and 94 minutes versus significantly less times of 11.3 minutes (P = 0.009), 10.6 minutes (P = 0.000001), and 73 minutes (P = 0.0001), respectively, for ESVH. The early, minor wound complication rate was 32% for the ESVH group versus 3% for the BT group (P = 0.0048). However, excluding small wound hematomas, the wound complication rate in the ESVH group fell to 13%. Graft quality was acceptable in both groups.
ESVH was demonstrated to be a useful procedure to harvest saphenous veins for CABG surgery. The ESVH technique allowed the harvesting of a longer vein, via shorter and fewer incisions and in less time. However, for maximum operating room efficiency with the new technology, staff education is essential. There was a greater incidence of minor wound complications in the ESVH group; however, the majority of these ESVH complications were small wound hematomas, which did not occur as surgeon experience with the technique increased.
手术中使用的最长切口是用于获取大隐静脉进行动脉移植的标准切口。这种长切口会带来明显的疼痛和并发症。我们对两种相对微创的技术进行了比较研究:标准桥接技术(BT)和内镜下大隐静脉获取术(ESVH)。
这是一项前瞻性、非随机、病例匹配研究,对同期接受多支血管冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)的患者进行微创大隐静脉获取。数据点包括手术时间、总伤口长度、获取的静脉长度、术中并发症、转为开放手术情况、移植物损伤、术后并发症及住院时间。出院后随访持续8周。
在10个月期间(1996年7月至1997年5月),共进行了60次大隐静脉获取,其中29次采用BT,31次采用ESVH。除ESVH组外周血管疾病患者数量较多外,患者人口统计学特征匹配良好。ESVH仅需2.3个切口,而BT需5个切口(P = 0.000001);ESVH获取的平均静脉长度为53.9 cm,而BT为47.7 cm(P = 0.05)。两组的获取时间相当。然而,BT的平均静脉准备时间、切口闭合时间和总静脉手术时间分别为18.5分钟、35.1分钟和94分钟,而ESVH的相应时间明显更短,分别为11.3分钟(P = 0.009)、10.6分钟(P = 0.000001)和73分钟(P = 0.0001)。ESVH组早期轻微伤口并发症发生率为32%,而BT组为3%(P = 0.0048)。然而,排除小伤口血肿后,ESVH组的伤口并发症发生率降至13%。两组的移植物质量均可接受。
ESVH被证明是一种用于CABG手术获取大隐静脉的有用方法。ESVH技术能够通过更短、更少的切口在更短时间内获取更长的静脉。然而,为了使新技术在手术室达到最高效率,工作人员培训至关重要。ESVH组轻微伤口并发症的发生率更高;然而,随着外科医生对该技术经验的增加,这些ESVH并发症大多为小伤口血肿,其发生率并未出现。