ALTERNATIVE AUTOLOGOUS VEIN GRAFTS VERSUS SINGLE SEGMENT GREAT
SAPHENOUS VEIN IN LOWER EXTREMITY BYPASS SURGERY -
SINGLE-CENTER STUDY

J 2025

ALTERNATIVE AUTOLOGOUS VEIN GRAFTS VERSUS SINGLE SEGMENT GREAT SAPHENOUS VEIN IN LOWER EXTREMITY BYPASS SURGERY - SINGLE-CENTER STUDY

BIROŠ, Ernest; Robert STAFFA; Miroslav KREJČÍ; Martin FERKODIČ; Dominik MADUDA et al.

Základní údaje

Originální název

ALTERNATIVE AUTOLOGOUS VEIN GRAFTS VERSUS SINGLE SEGMENT GREAT SAPHENOUS VEIN IN LOWER EXTREMITY BYPASS SURGERY - SINGLE-CENTER STUDY

Autoři

BIROŠ, Ernest; Robert STAFFA; Miroslav KREJČÍ; Martin FERKODIČ; Dominik MADUDA a Zdeněk BEDNAŘÍK

Vydání

Annals of Vascular Surgery, NEW YORK, ELSEVIER, 2025, 0890-5096

Další údaje

Jazyk

angličtina

Typ výsledku

Článek v odborném periodiku

Obor

30212 Surgery

Stát vydavatele

Spojené státy

Utajení

není předmětem státního či obchodního tajemství

Odkazy

URL

Impakt faktor

Impact factor: 1.600 v roce 2024

Označené pro přenos do RIV

Ano

Organizační jednotka

Lékařská fakulta

Klíčová slova anglicky

Lower extremity bypass; autologous vein graft; great saphenous vein; peripheral arterial disease; vascular surgery

Štítky

rivok

Příznaky

Mezinárodní význam, Recenzováno

Změněno: 7. 4. 2026 09:28, Mgr. Tereza Miškechová

Anotace

V originále

Objectives Studies comparing alternative autologous vein grafts (AAVG) to single-segment great saphenous vein (ssGSV) grafts report mixed results. The status of AAVG as first choice when ssGSV is unavailable is not unequivocal, based on current evidence. Our study compares results between AAVG and ssGSV in lower extremity bypass surgery. Methods A single-center retrospective cohort study involving all patients who underwent infrainguinal bypass using AAVG (arm veins, spliced arm or arm-leg veins) and ssGSV, April 2019-June 2023. Study endpoints were patency rates and amputation-free survival (AFS). Results There were 65 (20.8%) patients in the AAVG group, 247 (79.2%) in the ssGSV group. Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia (CLTI) was the most frequent indication for surgery (AAVG 54/65, 83.1% vs. ssGSV 170/247, 68.8%), followed by acute limb ischemia (AAVG 6/65, 9.2% vs. ssGSV 28/247, 11.3%); claudicants presented only in ssGSV group (AAVG 0/65, 0% vs. ssGSV 44/247, 17.8%). More re-do operations occurred in AAVG than ssGSV group (23/65, 35.4% vs. 26/247, 10.5%;p<.001). Spliced-vein grafts represented 87.7% (57/65) of AAVG bypasses. Median follow-up was 20.1 months for AAVG group, 27.5 for ssGSV group. Three-year patency rates between AAVG vs. ssGSV: primary 59.3%±8.2% vs. 69.2%± 3.8%,p=.113; primary assisted 75.2%±7.1% vs. 73.5%±3.4%,p =.790; secondary 74.9%±7.1% vs. 74.4%± 3.4%,p=.667; did not display significant difference between groups, nor did 3-year AFS in CLTI patients; 70.7%±7.9% vs. 54.6%±4.8%;p=.273. Conclusions Alternative autologous vein grafts should be the first conduit choice when single-segment great saphenous vein is unavailable. Mid-term patency rates do not differ from those of ssGSV grafts despite higher reintervention rate.

Citovat

BIROŠ, Ernest; Robert STAFFA; Miroslav KREJČÍ; Martin FERKODIČ; Dominik MADUDA a Zdeněk BEDNAŘÍK. ALTERNATIVE AUTOLOGOUS VEIN GRAFTS VERSUS SINGLE SEGMENT GREAT SAPHENOUS VEIN IN LOWER EXTREMITY BYPASS SURGERY - SINGLE-CENTER STUDY. Annals of Vascular Surgery. NEW YORK: ELSEVIER, 2025, roč. 114, May 2025, s. 13-23. ISSN 0890-5096. Dostupné z: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avsg.2025.01.027.

@article{2474872,
   author = {Biroš, Ernest and Staffa, Robert and Krejčí, Miroslav and Ferkodič, Martin and Maduda, Dominik and Bednařík, Zdeněk},
   article_location = {NEW YORK},
   article_number = {May 2025},
   doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avsg.2025.01.027},
   keywords = {Lower extremity bypass; autologous vein graft; great saphenous vein; peripheral arterial disease; vascular surgery},
   language = {eng},
   issn = {0890-5096},
   journal = {Annals of Vascular Surgery},
   title = {ALTERNATIVE AUTOLOGOUS VEIN GRAFTS VERSUS SINGLE SEGMENT GREAT SAPHENOUS VEIN IN LOWER EXTREMITY BYPASS SURGERY - SINGLE-CENTER STUDY},
   url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0890509625000548?CMX_ID=&SIS_ID=&dgcid=STMJ_219742_AUTH_SERV_PA&utm_acid=129676833&utm_campaign=STMJ_219742_AUTH_SERV_PA&utm_in=DM539090&utm_medium=email&utm_source=AC_},
   volume = {114},
   year = {2025}
}

TY  - JOUR
ID  - 2474872
AU  - Biroš, Ernest - Staffa, Robert - Krejčí, Miroslav - Ferkodič, Martin - Maduda, Dominik - Bednařík, Zdeněk
PY  - 2025
TI  - ALTERNATIVE AUTOLOGOUS VEIN GRAFTS VERSUS SINGLE SEGMENT GREAT SAPHENOUS VEIN IN LOWER EXTREMITY BYPASS SURGERY - SINGLE-CENTER STUDY
JF  - Annals of Vascular Surgery
VL  - 114
IS  - May 2025
SP  - 13-23
EP  - 13-23
PB  - ELSEVIER
SN  - 08905096
KW  - Lower extremity bypass
KW  - autologous vein graft
KW  - great saphenous vein
KW  - peripheral arterial disease
KW  - vascular surgery
UR  - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0890509625000548?CMX_ID=&SIS_ID=&dgcid=STMJ_219742_AUTH_SERV_PA&utm_acid=129676833&utm_campaign=STMJ_219742_AUTH_SERV_PA&utm_in=DM539090&utm_medium=email&utm_source=AC_
N2  - Objectives Studies comparing alternative autologous vein grafts (AAVG) to single-segment great saphenous vein (ssGSV) grafts report mixed results. The status of AAVG as first choice when ssGSV is unavailable is not unequivocal, based on current evidence. Our study compares results between AAVG and ssGSV in lower extremity bypass surgery. Methods A single-center retrospective cohort study involving all patients who underwent infrainguinal bypass using AAVG (arm veins, spliced arm or arm-leg veins) and ssGSV, April 2019-June 2023. Study endpoints were patency rates and amputation-free survival (AFS). Results There were 65 (20.8%) patients in the AAVG group, 247 (79.2%) in the ssGSV group. Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia (CLTI) was the most frequent indication for surgery (AAVG 54/65, 83.1% vs. ssGSV 170/247, 68.8%), followed by acute limb ischemia (AAVG 6/65, 9.2% vs. ssGSV 28/247, 11.3%); claudicants presented only in ssGSV group (AAVG 0/65, 0% vs. ssGSV 44/247, 17.8%). More re-do operations occurred in AAVG than ssGSV group (23/65, 35.4% vs. 26/247, 10.5%;p<.001). Spliced-vein grafts represented 87.7% (57/65) of AAVG bypasses. Median follow-up was 20.1 months for AAVG group, 27.5 for ssGSV group. Three-year patency rates between AAVG vs. ssGSV: primary 59.3%±8.2% vs. 69.2%± 3.8%,p=.113; primary assisted 75.2%±7.1% vs. 73.5%±3.4%,p =.790; secondary 74.9%±7.1% vs. 74.4%± 3.4%,p=.667; did not display significant difference between groups, nor did 3-year AFS in CLTI patients; 70.7%±7.9% vs. 54.6%±4.8%;p=.273. Conclusions Alternative autologous vein grafts should be the first conduit choice when single-segment great saphenous vein is unavailable. Mid-term patency rates do not differ from those of ssGSV grafts despite higher reintervention rate.
ER  -

BIROŠ, Ernest; Robert STAFFA; Miroslav KREJČÍ; Martin FERKODIČ; Dominik MADUDA a Zdeněk BEDNAŘÍK. ALTERNATIVE AUTOLOGOUS VEIN GRAFTS VERSUS SINGLE SEGMENT GREAT SAPHENOUS VEIN IN LOWER EXTREMITY BYPASS SURGERY - SINGLE-CENTER STUDY. \textit{Annals of Vascular Surgery}. NEW YORK: ELSEVIER, 2025, roč.~114, May 2025, s.~13-23. ISSN~0890-5096. Dostupné z: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avsg.2025.01.027.

Přehled o publikaci