Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byΞενία Αλεξίου Modified over 6 years ago
1
Pedal bypass versus tibial bypass with autogenous vein: A comparison of outcome and hemodynamic results Joseph R. Schneider, MD, PhD, Daniel B. Walsh, MD, Martha D. McDaniel, MD, Robert M. Zwolak, MD, PhD, Sharon R. Besso, RN, MS, Jack L. Cronenwett, MD Journal of Vascular Surgery Volume 17, Issue 6, Pages (June 1993) DOI: / (93)90673-A Copyright © 1993 Society for Vascular Surgery and International Society for Cardiovascular Surgery, North American Chapter Terms and Conditions
2
Fig. 1 Patient survival after autogenous vein bypass for chronic limb-threatening ischemia to pedal arteries versus tibial arteries. Number of patients entering next interval alive is shown for each group. SEM at 5 years is shown by error bar. Survival line is broken when SEM exceeds 10%. Although operative mortality rates were higher for patients undergoing pedal bypass and initial survival for patients undergoing pedal grafting was slightly less than that of patients undergoing tibial grafting, long-term survival was not significantly different between two groups. Journal of Vascular Surgery , DOI: ( / (93)90673-A) Copyright © 1993 Society for Vascular Surgery and International Society for Cardiovascular Surgery, North American Chapter Terms and Conditions
3
Fig. 2 Primary, assisted primary, and secondary patency rates after autogenous vein bypass for limb salvage to pedal arteries versus tibial arteries. Long-term patency rates by all measures were comparable for pedal and tibial grafts. Journal of Vascular Surgery , DOI: ( / (93)90673-A) Copyright © 1993 Society for Vascular Surgery and International Society for Cardiovascular Surgery, North American Chapter Terms and Conditions
4
Fig. 3 Primary, assisted primary, and secondary patency rates after autogenous vein bypass for limb salvage to all infrapopliteal arteries comparing in situ greater saphenous vein, reversed greater saphenous vein, and other vein. Primary, assisted primary, and secondary patency rates were comparable for in situ and reversed greater saphenous vein grafts. Long-term patency rates by all measures were inferior for “other” vein graft types (see text). Journal of Vascular Surgery , DOI: ( / (93)90673-A) Copyright © 1993 Society for Vascular Surgery and International Society for Cardiovascular Surgery, North American Chapter Terms and Conditions
5
Fig. 4 Limb salvage after autogenous vein bypass for chronic limb-threatening ischemia compares (A) grafts to pedal arteries versus tibial arteries and (B) in situ greater saphenous, reversed greater saphenous, and other veins. Trend toward better limb salvage with pedal bypass was not statistically significant. Limb salvage was comparable for in situ and reversed greater saphenous vein but significantly inferior when other veins were used. Journal of Vascular Surgery , DOI: ( / (93)90673-A) Copyright © 1993 Society for Vascular Surgery and International Society for Cardiovascular Surgery, North American Chapter Terms and Conditions
6
Fig. 5 Primary patency rates of pedal versus peroneal artery bypass grafts. Journal of Vascular Surgery , DOI: ( / (93)90673-A) Copyright © 1993 Society for Vascular Surgery and International Society for Cardiovascular Surgery, North American Chapter Terms and Conditions
Similar presentations
© 2024 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.