The use of the cephalic and basilic veins as peripheral vascular grafts

The use of arm vein in lower-extremity revascularization: results of 520 procedures performed in eight years

PURPOSE

The absence of an adequate ipsilateral saphenous vein in patients requiring lower-extremity revascularization poses a difficult clinical dilemma. This study examined the results of the use of autogenous arm vein bypass grafts in these patients.

METHODS

Five hundred twenty lower-extremity revascularization procedures performed between 1990 and 1998 were followed prospectively with a computerized vascular registry. The arm vein conduit was prepared by using intraoperative angioscopy for valve lysis and identification of luminal abnormalities in 44.8% of cases.

RESULTS

Seventy-two (13. 8%) femoropopliteal, 174 (33.5%) femorotibial, 29 (5.6%) femoropedal, 101 (19.4%) popliteo-tibial/pedal, and 144 (27.7%) extension "jump" graft bypass procedures were performed for limb salvage (98.2%) or disabling claudication (1.8%). The average age of patients was 68.5 years (range, 32 to 91 years); 63.1% of patients were men, and 36.9% of patients were women. Eighty-five percent of patients had diabetes mellitus, and 77% of patients had a recent history of smoking. The grafts were composed of a single arm vein segment in 363 cases (69. 8%) and of spliced composite vein with venovenostomy in 157 cases (30.2%). The mean follow-up period was 24.9 months (range, 1 month to 7.4 years). Overall patency and limb salvage rates for all graft types were: primary patency, 30-day = 97.0% +/- 0.7%, 1-year = 80.2% +/- 2.1%, 3-year = 68.9% +/- 3.6%, 5-year = 54.5% +/- 6.6%; secondary patency, 30-day = 97.0% +/- 0.7%, 1-year = 80.7% +/- 2.1%, 3-year = 70.3% +/- 3.4%, 5-year = 57.5% +/- 6.2%; limb salvage, 30-day = 97.6% +/- 0.7%, 1-year = 89.8% +/- 1.7%, 3-year = 82.1% +/- 3.3%, 5-year = 71.5% +/- 6.9%. Secondary patency and limb salvage rates were greatest at 5 years for femoropopliteal grafts (69.8% +/- 12.8%, 80.7% +/- 11.8%), as compared with femorotibial (59.6% +/- 10. 3%, 72.7% +/- 10.5%), femoropedal (54.9% +/- 25.7%, 56.8% +/- 26.9%, ) and popliteo-tibial/pedal grafts (39.0% +/- 7.3%, 47.6% +/- 15.4%). The patency rate of composite vein grafts was equal to that of single-vein conduits. The overall survival rate was 54% at 4 years.

CONCLUSION

Autogenous arm vein has been used successfully in a wide variety of lower-extremity revascularization procedures and has achieved excellent long- and short-term patency and limb salvage rates, higher than those generally reported for prosthetic or cryopreserved grafts. Its durability and easy accessibility make it an alternative conduit of choice when an adequate saphenous vein is not available.

The use of arm vein as an alternative conduit for lower-extremity bypass

A 4-year retrospective review of all cases utilizing arm vein for lower-extremity bypass was undertaken. Thirty-six cases were reviewed. The patients had portions of the basilic or cephalic arm veins, or both, harvested and used as a bypass for limb salvage. Composite grafts using a portion of arm vein were excluded. Information on demographics, risk factors, vascular surgical history, presenting signs and symptoms, surgical complications, patient comfort (arm vs. leg pain), and patency rates was studied. We found that all patients were initially seen with claudication or rest pain, that 22% had gangrenous changes, that there was a male dominance (75%), and that all had previous coronary artery bypass grafts or lower-extremity bypass. Limb salvage rate was 85% at 4 years. Primary patency rate was 71% at 4 years. We conclude that arm vein is a useful and durable conduit for bypass. Patient acceptance and comfort is high.

Results of bypass to the popliteal and tibial arteries with alternative sources of autogenous vein

PURPOSE

The goal of an all-autogenous policy for infrainguinal arterial bypass requires that many bypasses be performed with alternative autogenous veins (AAV) because an adequate length of ipsilateral or contralateral greater saphenous vein (GSV) is not available. The durability and efficacy of infrainguinal vein bypasses constructed of venous conduits other than a single segment of greater saphenous vein (SSGSV) is, however, questioned.

METHODS

AAV and GSV bypasses were reviewed from 1980 through 1994. Patients who required bypass to the popliteal or a tibial artery were compared for vascular surgical history and vascular disease risk factors and life-table survival. AAV and SSGSV procedures were compared for indications for surgery, morbidity and mortality rates, limb salvage rates in patients who underwent surgery for limb-salvage indications, subsequent need for revision, and life-table-assisted primary patency.

RESULTS

Nine hundred nineteen autogenous vein bypasses were performed to the popliteal or a tibial artery--187 (20%) with AAVs, including whole or partial arm vein conduits in 144 grafts (77%). One hundred fourteen AAVs (61%) required vein splicing. The mortality rate was 2% for SSGSV bypasses and 1% for AAV bypasses. The morbidity rate was higher for GSV surgery as a result of increased wound complications (11% vs 5%; p=0.02). Sixty-seven percent of patients with AAV bypass extremities had undergone previous ipsilateral arterial surgery, compared with 20% of patients with SSGSV bypasses (p0.0005). AAV bypasses were more likely to be to a tibial artery (71% vs 45%; p<0.0001). Twelve percent of SSGSV and 15% of AAV popliteal bypasses required revision (p=NS). The 5-year assisted primary patencies were 82%, 77%, and 63%, with limb salvage rates of 91%, 86%, and 74% for ipsilateral SSGSV, contralateral SSGSV, and AAV femoropopliteal bypasses, respectively. Twelve percent of SSGSV and 30% of AAV tibial bypasses required revision (p=0.0001). The 5-year assisted primary patencies were 74%, 82%, and 72%, with limb salvage rates of 84%, 92% and 78% for ipsilateral SSGSV, contralateral SSGSV, and AAV femorotibial bypasses, respectively.

CONCLUSION

AAV bypasses can provide overall results comparable with SSGSV bypasses.

Infrainguinal reconstruction with arm vein, lesser saphenous vein, and remnants of greater saphenous vein: a report of 257 cases

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the results of infrainguinal reconstructions with arm vein, lesser saphenous vein, and remnants of greater saphenous vein (ectopic vein grafts).

METHODS

The records of 222 patients who underwent 257 bypasses were restrospectively reviewed. Most of the grafts were placed for rest pain or tissue loss (88%) and were secondary reconstructions (70%) to the infrapopliteal level (90%). Single-length vein grafts were constructed in 66% of cases, whereas 34% were composite vein grafts.

RESULTS

Secondary graft patency was 70%, 52%, and 43% at 1, 3, and 5 years. Single-length grafts had significantly better patency rates at all intervals: 78% versus 56% at 1 year (p = 0.001), 60% versus 39% at 3 years (p = 0.004), and 52% versus 29% at 5 years (p = 0.002). The limb salvage rate was 69% at 5 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Ectopic vein grafts with primarily arm vein are an acceptable alternative for infrainguinal reconstruction in the absence of suitable ipsilateral greater saphenous vein.

Successful long-term limb salvage using cephalic vein bypass grafts

Successful long-term limb salvage using cephalic vein bypass grafts was attained in 70 limbs of 67 patients over the past 11 years. The saphenous vein was absent in 76% and inadequate in 24% of the cases. Revascularization for limb salvage was carried out in 83%. Ninety per cent of the grafts were extended to the infrageniculate level while 56% were to a tibial vessel. Patency rates at 1, 3, and 5 years were 85%, 72%, and 68%, respectively. Limb salvage rate was 85% at 5 years and thereafter. There were no operative deaths or upper extremity morbidity. The 5-year survival rate was 50%. The results obtained with cephalic vein were comparable to those reported using saphenous vein but superior to those reported for nonautogenous bypass grafts.