Analysis of Intermediate Term Results of Short Vein Bypass Graft in the Patient with Critical Limb Ischemia

PURPOSE Since the introduction of short vein bypass (SVB), many have reported its feasibility when long vein bypass (LVB) cannot be performed due to limited vein conduit. However, the presence of inflow-vessel disease may affect graft patency and thus require endovascular treatment prior to surgery. Our study aims to analyze the results between SVB and LVB. MATERIALS AND METHODS From 2009 to 2013, 27 bypass procedures were reviewed retrospectively. Outcomes such as patency rate, postoperative ankle brachial index (ABI) and limb salvage rate between SVB and LVB were compared. Wound healing time and primary patency rate were analyzed and the former was also analyzed according to the respective angiosome and revascularization type. RESULTS There were 11 males and 16 females and the mean age was 66.6±12.3 years. Twenty four patients had TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus (TASC) D and 3 patients had TASC C lesions below knee. The 1-year cumulative patency rate between SVB and LVB were 63% and 66%, P=0.627. The limb salvage rate (100% vs. 73%; P=0.280) and postoperative ABI (0.592 vs. 0.508; P=0.620) were higher in the SVB group than in the LVB group, although the differences were not significant. There was no difference in wound healing time by angiosomal revascularization type. In situ vein graft showed higher patency rate than reversed greater saphenous vein (75% vs. 61%; P=0.00). CONCLUSION The results of SVB were similar to those of LVB. SVB is feasible in the setting of limited conduit availability, in combination with endovascular treatment in the presence of proximal lesions.