Alternative Autologous Vein Grafts versus Single-Segment Great Saphenous Vein in Lower Extremity Bypass Surgery−Single-Center Study
The result's identifiers
Result code in IS VaVaI
<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00159816%3A_____%2F25%3A00082497" target="_blank" >RIV/00159816:_____/25:00082497 - isvavai.cz</a>
Alternative codes found
RIV/00216224:14110/25:00140604
Result on the web
<a href="https://www.annalsofvascularsurgery.com/article/S0890-5096(25)00054-8/abstract" target="_blank" >https://www.annalsofvascularsurgery.com/article/S0890-5096(25)00054-8/abstract</a>
DOI - Digital Object Identifier
<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.avsg.2025.01.027" target="_blank" >10.1016/j.avsg.2025.01.027</a>
Alternative languages
Result language
angličtina
Original language name
Alternative Autologous Vein Grafts versus Single-Segment Great Saphenous Vein in Lower Extremity Bypass Surgery−Single-Center Study
Original language description
Background: Studies comparing alternative autologous vein grafts (AAVGs) to single-segment great saphenous vein (ssGSV) grafts report mixed results. The status of AAVG as first choice when ssGSV is unavailable is not unequivocal based on current evidence. Our study compares results between AAVG and ssGSV in lower extremity bypass (LEB) surgery. Methods: A single-center retrospective cohort study involving all patients who underwent infrainguinal bypass using AAVG (arm veins, spliced arm, or arm-leg veins) and ssGSV from April 2019 to June 2023. Study endpoints were patency rates and amputation-free survival (AFS). Results: There were 65 (20.8%) patients in the AAVG group, 247 (79.2%) in the ssGSV group. Chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) was the most frequent indication for surgery (AAVG 54/65, 83.1% vs. ssGSV 170/247, 68.8%), followed by acute limb ischemia (ALI) (AAVG 6/65, 9.2% vs. ssGSV 28/247, 11.3%); claudicants were presented only in the ssGSV group (AAVG 0/65, 0% vs. ssGSV 44/247, 17.8%). More redo operations occurred in AAVG than in the ssGSV group (23/65, 35.4% vs. 26/247, 10.5%; P < 0.001). Spliced vein grafts represented 87.7% (57/65) of AAVG bypasses. The median follow-up was 20.1 months for the AAVG group and 27.5 for the ssGSV group. Three-year patency rates between AAVG versus ssGSV: primary patency (PP) 59.3% +- 8.2% versus 69.2% +- 3.8%, P = 0.113; primary assisted patency (PAP) 75.2% +- 7.1% versus 73.5% +- 3.4%, P = 0.790; secondary patency (SP) 74.9% +- 7.1% versus 74.4% +- 3.4%, P = 0.667; did not display significant difference between groups nor did 3-year AFS in CLTI patients; 70.7% +- 7.9% versus 54.6% +- 4.8%; P = 0.273. Conclusion: AAVGs should be the first conduit choice when ssGSV is unavailable. Mid-term patency rates do not differ from those of ssGSV grafts despite higher reintervention rate. (C) 2025 Elsevier Inc.
Czech name
—
Czech description
—
Classification
Type
J<sub>SC</sub> - Article in a specialist periodical, which is included in the SCOPUS database
CEP classification
—
OECD FORD branch
30212 - Surgery
Result continuities
Project
—
Continuities
I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace
Others
Publication year
2025
Confidentiality
S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů
Data specific for result type
Name of the periodical
ANNALS OF VASCULAR SURGERY
ISSN
0890-5096
e-ISSN
1615-5947
Volume of the periodical
114
Issue of the periodical within the volume
May 2025
Country of publishing house
US - UNITED STATES
Number of pages
11
Pages from-to
13-23
UT code for WoS article
—
EID of the result in the Scopus database
2-s2.0-85217698225