|
|
Back to Annual Symposium Program
Outcome of Prosthetic versus Vein Grafts for Below-Knee Bypass in Real World Practice
Bjoern D. Suckow, MD1, Larry W. Kraiss, MD1, David H. Stone, MD2, Andres Schanzer, MD3, Daniel J. Bertges, MD4, Jack L. Cronenwett, MD2, Philip P. Goodney, MD2. 1University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA, 2Dartmouth Medical School, Hanover, NH, USA, 3University of Massachusetts School of Medicine, Worcester, MA, USA, 4University of Vermont College of Medicine, Burlington, VT, USA.
Objectives: Native venous conduit is preferred in below-knee vascular reconstructions. However, many argue that prosthetic grafts can perform well in crural bypass with adjunctive antithrombotic therapy. We therefore compared outcomes of below-knee bypass grafts using prosthetic conduit with adjunctive antithrombotic therapy to those using autologous vein. Methods: Utilizing the Vascular Study Group of New England registry (2003 - 2009), we studied 308 patients with a prosthetic graft to the below-knee popliteal artery (76%) or more distal target (24%). We used propensity matching to identify a patient cohort who received single-segment saphenous vein (GSV) yet remained similar to the prosthetic cohort in terms of patient characteristics, graft origin/target and antithrombotic regimen (Table 1). Main outcome measures were graft patency and major adverse limb events (MALE = ipsilateral amputation, graft revision or thrombectomy/thrombolysis) within one year. Secondary outcomes were bleeding complications (re-operation or transfusion) and mortality. We performed comparisons by conduit type and by antithrombotic therapy. Results: Patients receiving prosthetic conduit were more likely to be treated with warfarin than those with GSV (51% versus 22%, p<0.001). Prosthetic grafts with tibial targets received the most aggressive antithrombotic combination (aspirin+clopidogrel+warfarin) more commonly than popliteal targets (26% versus 9%, p<0.001). At one year, we found no significant difference in primary or secondary outcomes by conduit type (Table 2). While 1-year prosthetic graft patency rates varied from 68% (aspirin+clopidogrel+warfarin) to 82% (aspirin), no significant differences were seen in primary patency or MALE by antithrombotic therapy (p=0.32 and 0.8, respectively). Further, the incidence of bleeding complications and 1-year mortality in prosthetic graft patients was similar among antithrombotic regimens. Conclusions: While limited in size, our study demonstrates that, with appropriate patient selection and antithrombotic therapy, 1-year outcomes for below-knee prosthetic grafts can be comparable to greater saphenous vein conduit.
Table 1 - Comparison of Native and Propensity-Matched Cohorts | Native Cohort | Propensity-Matched Cohort | Variable | Prosthetic(n=308) | Greater Saphenous Vein(n=1,356) | p-value | Prosthetic(n=287) | Greater Saphenous Vein(n=287) | p-value | Male Gender | 64% | 73% | 0.002 | 67% | 68% | 0.65 | Coronary Artery Disease | 49% | 34% | <0.001 | 48% | 49% | 0.87 | Previous Arterial Bypass | 46% | 25% | <0.001 | 46% | 46% | 1 | Below-Knee Popliteal Target | 76% | 52% | <0.001 | 75% | 77% | 0.49 | Aspirin only | 34% | 59% | <0.001 | 37% | 41% | 0.43 | Aspirin + Clopidogrel | 15% | 20% | 0.04 | 16% | 15% | 0.82 | Aspirin + Warfarin | 39% | 17% | <0.001 | 36% | 33% | 0.53 | Aspirin + Clopidogrel + Warfarin | 12% | 5% | <0.001 | 11% | 11% | 1 |
Table 2 - Comparison of Outcomes in the Propensity-Matched CohortVariable | Prosthetic(n=287) | Greater Saphenous Vein (n=287) | p-value | Primary Graft Patency at 1 Year | 80% | 81% | 0.44 | Incidence of MALE at 1 Year | 20% | 17% | 0.25 | Patient Survival at 1 Year | 87% | 89% | 0.5 | Bleeding Complications | 10% | 11% | 0.79 |
Back to Annual Symposium Program
|