CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology

, Volume 20, Issue 2, pp 98–102 | Cite as

The predictive value of angiographic results for the outcome of percutaneous transluminal angioplasty in stenosed femoral bypass grafts

  • Anje M. Spijkerboer
  • Frederik J. A. Beek
  • Yolanda van der Graaf
  • Bert C. Eikelboom
  • Willem P. T. M. Mali
Clinical Investigations



To assess the predictive value of immediate angiographic results after percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) for stenoses in femoral bypass grafts using duplex ultrasound (DUS) criteria.


A 1-year follow-up with DUS was performed in 38 patients with 50 stenoses in 41 grafts, treated with PTA for a graft stenosis. The indication for PTA according to DUS criteria was a severe stenosis in 43 lesions, and a moderate stenosis in 7 lesions. In the moderate stenosis group 3 patients showed claudication and 1 patient had a nonhealing ulcer. For the purposes of statistical evaluation, primary patency was considered present if the graft was not occluded. The graft was considered to have failed when it was found to be occluded on DUS, or when secondary interventions (surgery, repeat PTA) were performed.


After 1 year the cumulative primary patency rate was 44$ [95% confidence interval (CI) 27.8–59.8]. Stenoses with initially good angiographic results after PTA (<30% residual stenosis) were 2.9 times more likely to be patent at 1 year than stenoses with initially poor or moderate angiographic results (hazard ratio 2.9, 95% CI 1.3–6.4,p=0.007).


A poor or moderate angiographic result immediately following PTA was prognostic for poor long-term results and may indicate a requirement for earlier surgical intervention.

Key words

Angioplasty Duplex ultrasound Femoral bypass Graft stenosis 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Mills JL, Harris EJ, Taylor LM, Beckett WC, Porter JM (1990) The importance of routine surveillance of distal bypass grafts with duplex scanning: A study of 379 reversed vein grafts. J Vasc Surg 12:379–389PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lundell A, Lindblad B, Bergqvist D, Hansen F (1995) Femoropopliteal-crural graft patency is improved by an intensive surveillance program: A prospective randomized study. J Vasc Surg 21:26–34PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dunlop P, Hartshorne T, Bolia A, Bell PRF, London NJM (1995) The long-term outcome of infrainguinal vein graft surveillance. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 10:352–355PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wolfe JHN, Thomas ML, Jamieson CW, Browse NL, Burnand KG, Rutt DL (1987) Early diagnosis of femoropopliteal graft stenoses. Br J Surg 74:268–270PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Harris PL (1992) Vein graft surveillance: All part of the service. Br J Surg 79:97–98PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dalsing MC, Dolores FC, Lalka SG, Sawchuk AP, Schulz C (1995) Femorodistal vein grafts: The utility of graft surveillance criteria. J Vasc Surg 21:127–134PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    McShane MD, Gazzard VM, Clifford PC, Humphries KN, Webster JHH, Chant ADB (1987) Duplex ultrasound monitoring of arterial grafts: Prospective evaluation in conjunction with ankle pressure indices after femorodistal bypass. Eur J Vasc Surg 1:385–390PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Laborde AL, Synn AY, Worsey MJ, Bower TR, Hoballah JJ, Sharp WJ, Kresowik TF, Corson JD (1992) A prospective comparison of ankle/brachial indices and color duplex imaging in surveillance of the in situ saphenous vein bypass. J Cardiovasc Surg 33:420–425Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nielsen TG, von Jessen F, Sillesen H, Schroeder TV (1993) Doppler spectral characteristics of infrainguinal vein bypasses. Eur J Vasc Surg 7:610–615PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Perler BA, Osterman FA, Mitchell SE, Burdick JF, Williams GM (1990) Balloon dilatation versus surgical revision of infra-inguinal autogenous vein graft stenoses: Long-term follow-up. J Cardiovasc Surg 31:656–661Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Whittemore AD, Donaldson MC, Polak JF, Mannick JA (1991) Limitations of ballon angioplasty for vein graft stenosis. J Vasc Surg 14:340–345PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sanchez LA, Suggs WD, Marin ML, Panetta TF, Wengerter KR, Veith FJ (1994) Is percutaneous balloon angioplasty appropriate in the treatment of graft and anastomotic lesions responsible for failing vein bypasses? Am J Surg 168:97–101PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Berkowitz HD, Fox AD, Deaton DH (1992) Reversed vein graft stenosis: Early diagnosis and management. J Vasc Surg 15:130–142.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Legemate DA, Teeuwen C, Hoeneveld H, Ackerstaff RGA, Eikelboom BC (1991) Spectral analysis criteria in Duplex scanning of aortoiliac and femoropopliteal arterial disease. Ultrasound Med Biol 17:769–776PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Van der Heyden FHWM, Legemate DA, van Leeuwen MS, Mali WPTM, Eikelboom BC (1993) Value of duplex scanning in the selection of patients for percutaneous transluminal angioplasty. Eur J Vasc Surg 7:71–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kaplan DR, Meier P (1958) Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations. J Am Stat Assoc 53:457–481CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cox DR (1972) Regression models and life tables. J R Stat Soc 34:187–202Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Egret (1990) Egret Statistical Package. Statistics and Epidemiology Research Corporation, Seattle.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Green RM, Ouriel K, Ricotta JJ, DeWeese JA (1986) Revision of failed infrainguinal bypass graft: Principles of management. Surgery 100:646–654PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Beidle TR, Brom-Ferral R, Letourneau JG (1994) Surveillance of infrainguinal vein grafts with duplex sonography. AJR 162:443–448PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sladen JG, Reid JDS, Cooperberg PL, Harrison PB, Maxwell TM, Riggs MO, Sanders LD (1989) Color flow duplex screening of infrainguinal grafts combining low- and high-velocity criteria. Am J Surg 158:107–112PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mills JL, Bandyk DF, Gahtan V, Esses GE (1995) The origin of infrainguinal vein graft stenosis: A prospective study based on duplex surveillance. J Vasc Surg 21:16–25PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Samson RH, Sprayregen S, Veith FJ, Scher LA, Gupta SK, Ascer E (1984) Management of angioplasty complications, unsuccessful procedures and early and late failures. Ann Surg 199:234–240PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Greenspan B, Pillari G, Schulman ML, Badhey M (1985) Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty of stenotic deep vein arterial bypass grafts. Arch Surg 120:492–495PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Cohen JR, Mannick JA, Coucj NP, Whittemore AD (1986) Recognition and management of impending vein-graft failure. Arch Surg 121:758–759.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Laissy J-P, Peillon C, Clavier E, Pernes J-M, Gaux J-C, Watelet J, Testart J, Benozio M (1990) Transluminal angioplasty of failing infrainguinal arterial bypass grafts: Initial and long-term results in 13 patients. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 13:14–17PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Taylor PR, Wolfe JHN, Tyrell MR, Mansfield AO, Nicolaides AN, Houston RE (1990) Graft stenosis: Justification for 1-year surveillance. Br J Surg 77:1125–1128PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Belkin M, Mackey WC, McLaughlin R, Umphrey SE, O’Donnell TF (1992) The variation in vein graft flow velocity with luminal diameter and outflow level. J Vasc Surg 15:991–999PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York Inc 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anje M. Spijkerboer
    • 1
  • Frederik J. A. Beek
    • 1
  • Yolanda van der Graaf
    • 2
  • Bert C. Eikelboom
    • 3
  • Willem P. T. M. Mali
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of RadiologyUniversity Hospital UtrechtUltrechtThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of Clinical EpidemiologyUniversity Hospital UtrechtUtrechtThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Department of Vascular SurgeryUniversity Hospital UtrechtUtrechtThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations