Key result
Short saphenous vein grafts for CABG show ~65% patency at six years in small reports.
Why the study?
What is the patency of the short saphenous vein when used for coronary artery bypass grafting?
Systematic Review
What is the patency of the short saphenous vein when used for coronary artery bypass grafting?
The short saphenous vein has a two-year patency of 77% and six-year patency of 65%, making it a viable alternative conduit for CABG when standard conduits are unsuitable.
Short saphenous vein shows 65-77% patency in small series; leaves open its role as alternative conduit pending larger prospective data.
A best evidence topic in cardiac surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was what the patency of the short saphenous vein is, when used for coronary artery bypass grafting. Altogether 347 papers were found using the reported search, of which nine represented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. The authors, journal, date and country of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes and results of these papers are tabulated. We conclude that small reports give a two-year patency of 77% and a six-year patency of 65% and duplex studies show that the short saphenous vein may be from 2.8 mm to 4.2 mm in diameter. However, caution should be applied when considering these patency rates as they are derived from individual studies of <40 patients. The lesser saphenous vein may be considered as an alternative to brachial or cephalic vein in patients with unsuitable long saphenous vein, and unsuitable mammary, radial or gastroepiploic arteries.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jacob et al. (2007) conducted a systematic review in Coronary artery bypass grafting. Short saphenous vein graft was evaluated on Vein graft patency. The short saphenous vein used for coronary artery bypass grafting demonstrated a two-year patency of 77% and a six-year patency of 65% in small reports.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: