Sixty-five patients with critical ischemia required bypass to foot vessels. These procedures were performed by five different techniques: (1) femoral-foot bypass with in situ saphenous vein; (2) femoral-foot bypass with reversed autogenous saphenous vein; (3) femoral-foot bypass with polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE); (4) popliteal-foot bypass with reversed autogenous saphenous vein; and (5) popliteal-foot bypass with PTFE. The two-year patency rate of femoral-foot bypass with in situ vein (96%) was significantly higher than femoral-foot bypass with reversed vein (42%), while both procedures demonstrated significantly higher patency than femoral-foot bypass with PTFE (0%). Popliteal-foot bypass with reversed vein (92%) was superior to both popliteal-foot bypass with PTFE (27%) and femoral-foot bypass with PTFE (0%). Femoral-foot bypass with in situ vein and popliteal-foot bypass with reversed vein have appreciably increased vein utilization, graft patency, and limb salvage.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dale Buchbinder (1986) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: