Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Results of infrainguinal revascularization with reversed vein conduits: a modern control series

  • Papers from the Peripheral Vascular Surgery 1990 Meeting
  • Published:
Annals of Vascular Surgery

Abstract

To determine the outcome of infrainguinal reversed vein bypasses in the modern era, we reviewed the results of 120 consecutive reversed vein grafts performed from March, 1986 to March, 1990. Forty-nine bypasses were to tibial, peroneal, or pedal arteries, 46 grafts to the below-knee popliteal artery, and 25 grafts to the above-knee popliteal artery. Limb salvage was the indication for revascularization in 70% of patients. All grafts were followed with serial, duplex scan, peak-systolic graft flow velocity measurements every three months for one year and every six months thereafter. The primary life table patency rate at 36 months was 67.6% for the entire series; the secondary patency rate was 92.5%. The secondary patency rate reflects the impact of graft revisions resulting from the detection of failing grafts by duplex scanning. Patency rates of reversed vein grafts to the tibial arteries at 36 months (73.8% primary and 89.8% secondary) were equivalent to those performed to the popliteal artery. Our current patency rates with reversed vein grafts are comparable or superior to those reported for in-situ vein conduits and suggest that operative technique and meticulous follow-up are more important with respect to long-term graft durability than whether the vein is used in the in-situ or reversed configuration.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. LEATHER RP, POWERS SR, KARMODY AM. A reappraisal of the in situ saphenous vein artery bypass: its use in limb salvage.Surgery 1979;86:453–461.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. BUSH HL Jr, NABSETH DC, CURL GR, et al. In situ saphenous vein bypass grafts for limb salvage. A current fad or a viable alternative to reversed vein bypass grafts?Am J Surg 1985;149:477–480.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. LEVINE AW, BANDYK DF, BONIER PH, et al. Lessons learned in adopting the in situ saphenous vein bypass.J Vasc Surg 1985;2:145–153.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. FOGLE MA, WHITTEMORE AD, COUCH NP, et al. A comparison of in situ and reversed saphenous vein grafts for infrainguinal reconstruction.J Vasc Surg 1987;5:46–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. IMPARATO AM, KIM GE, MADAYAG M, et al. The results of tibial artery reconstruction procedures.Surg Gynecol Obstet 1974;138:33–38.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. SZILAGYI DE, HAGEMAN JH, SMITH RF, et al. Autogenous vein grafting in femoropopliteal atherosclerosis: the limits of its effectiveness.Surgery 1979;86:836–851.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. REICHLE FA, MARTINSON MW, RANKIN KP. Infrapopliteal arterial reconstruction in the severely ischemic lower extremity. A comparison of long-term results of peroneal and tibial bypasses.Ann Surg 1980;191:59–65.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. KACOYANIS GP, WHITTEMORE AD, COUCH NP, et al. Femorotibial and femoroperoneal bypass vein grafts.Arch Surg 1981;116:1529–1534.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. TAYLOR LM Jr, PHINNEY ES, PORTER JM. Present status of reversed vein bypass for lower extremity revascularization.J Vasc Surg 1986;3:288–297.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. TAYLOR LM Jr, EDWARDS JM, PHINNEY ES, et al. Reversed vein bypass to infrapopliteal arteries.Ann Surg 1987;205:90–97.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. VEITH FS, GUPTA SK, ASCER E. Six year prospective multicenter randomized comparison of autologous saphenous vein and expanded polytetrafluoroethylene grafts in infrainguinal arterial reconstruction.J Vasc Surg 1986;3:104–113.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. VEITH FH, GUPTA SK, SAMSON RH, et al. Superficial femoral and popliteal arteries as inflow sites for distal bypass.Surgery 1981;90:980–990.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. KUNLIN J. Le traitement de l'ischemie arteritique apres la greffe veineuse longue.Rev Chir 1951;70:206–235.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. MULLER-WIEFEL W. Femoropopliteal bypass. In: BERGAN JJ, YAO JST (eds). Operative techniques in vascular surgery. New York: Grune and Stratton, 1980, pp 131–140.

    Google Scholar 

  15. BANDYK DF, CATES RF, TOWNE JB. A low flow velocity predicts failure of femoropopliteal and femorotibial bypass grafts.Surgery 1985;98:799–809.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. MILLS JL, HARRIS EJ, TAYLOR LM Jr, et al. The importance of routine surveillance of distal bypass grafts with duplex scanning: a study of 379 reversed vein grafts.J Vasc Surg 1990;12(4):379–389.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. MAY AG, DE WEESE JA, ROB CG. Arterialized in situ saphenous vein.Arch Surg 1965;91:743–750.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. HALL KV. The great saphenous vein used in situ as an arterial shunt after extirpation of the vein valves.Surgery 1962;51:492–495.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. CONNOLLY JE, STEMMER EA. The nonreversed saphenous vein bypass for femoral-popliteal occlusive disease.Surgery 1970;68:602–609.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. BARNER HB, JUDD DR, KAISER GC, et al. Late failure of arterialized in situ saphenous vein.Arch Surg 1969;99:781–786.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. SZILAGYI DE, ELLIOTT JP, HAGEMANN JH, et al. Biologic fate of autogenous vein implants as arterial substitutes.Ann Surg 1973;178:232–246.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. LEATHER RP, SHAH DM, KARMODY AM. Infrapopliteal arterial bypass for limb salvage; increased patency and utilization of the saphenous vein used “in situ”.Surgery 1981;90:1000–1007.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. HALLIN RW. In situ saphenous vein bypass grafting.Am J Surg 1983;145:626–629.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. HARRIS RW, ANDROS G, DULAWA LB. The transition to “in situ” vein bypass grafts.Surg Gynecol Obstet 1986;163:21–28.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. BUSH HL Jr, HONG SI, DEYKIN D, et al. Effect of surgical trauma on prostaglandin production by vein grafts.Surg Forum 1982;33:463–465.

    Google Scholar 

  26. LEATHER RP, SHAH DM, BUCHBINDER D. Further experience with the saphenous vein used in situ for arterial bypass.Am J Surg 1981;142:506–510.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. BUSH HL Jr, COREY CA, NABSETH DC. Distal in situ saphenous vein grafts for limb salvage. Increased operative blood flow and postoperative patency.Am J Surg 1983;145:542–548.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. CAMBRIA RP, MEGERMAN J, ABBOTT W. Endothelial preservation in reversed and in situ autogenous vein grafts.Ann Surg 1985;202:50–55.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. ADCOCK OT Jr, ADCOCK GLD, WHEELER JR. Optimal techniques for harvesting and preparation of reversed autogenous vein grafts for use as arterial substitutes: a review.Surgery 1984;96:886–893.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. CAMBRIA RP, BREWSTER DC, HASSON J. The evolution of morphologic and biomechanical changes in reversed and in situ vein grafts.Ann Surg 1987;205:167–174.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. KU DN, KLAFTA JM, GEWERTZ BL, et al. The contribution of valves to saphenous vein graft resistance.J Vasc Surg 1987;6:274–279.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. DALMAN RL, TAYLOR LM Jr. Basic data related to infrainguinal revascularization procedures.Ann Vasc Surg 1990;4:309–312.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Veterans Administration Cooperative Study Group 141. Comparative evaluation of prosthetic, reversed, and in situ vein bypass grafts in distal popliteal and tibial-peroneal revascularization.Arch Surg 1988;123:434–438.

    Google Scholar 

  34. HARRIS PL, HOW TV, JONES DR. Prospectively randomized clinical trial to compare in situ and reversed saphenous vein grafts.Br J Surg 1987;74:252–255.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. WATELET J, CHEYSSON E, POELS D. In situ versus reversed saphenous vein for femoropopliteal bypass: a prospective randomized study of 100 cases.Ann Vasc Surg 1986;1:441–452.

    Google Scholar 

  36. BANDYK DF, KAEBNICK HW, STEWART GW. Durability of the in situ saphenous vein arterial bypass: a comparison of primary and secondary patency.J Vasc Surg 1987;5:256–268.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. BELKIN M, DONALDSON MC, WHITTEMORE AD, et al. Observations on the use of thrombolytic agents for thrombotic occlusion of infrainguinal vein grafts.J Vasc Surg 1990;11:289–296.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Vascular Surgery Service/SGHSG, Wilford Hall USAF Medical Center, 78236-5300, Lackland AFB, Texas

    Joseph L. Mills MD (Chief) & Spence M. Taylor MD

Authors
  1. Joseph L. Mills MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Spence M. Taylor MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

The opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of the United States Air Force or the Department of Defense.

About this article

Cite this article

Mills, J.L., Taylor, S.M. Results of infrainguinal revascularization with reversed vein conduits: a modern control series. Annals of Vascular Surgery 5, 156–162 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02016749

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02016749

Key words

Search

Navigation