Comparisons between prosthetic vascular graft and saphenous vein graft in femoro-popliteal bypass.
Comparisons between prosthetic vascular graft and saphenous vein graft in femoro-popliteal bypass.Park KM, Kim YW, Yang SS, Kim DI. 20 May 2015
Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research (2014)
Infrainguinalfemoropopliteal bypass (IFPB) is recommended to peripheral arterial disease (PAD) with a long occlusion of the superficial femoral artery (SFA). The aims of our study were to determine the patency of graft materials, and identify the risk factors of graft failure
Cryopreserved saphenous vein graft in infrainguinal bypass.
Cryopreserved saphenous vein graft in infrainguinal bypass.Hartranft CA, Noland S, Kulwicki A, Holden CR, Hartranft T 06 November 2014
Journal of vascular surgery (2014)
Autogenous saphenous vein is the ideal conduit for lower extremity revascularization. Unfortunately, autogenous vein is unavailable in up to 20% of patients. Synthetic grafts provide an alternative; however, their use in distal revascularization has shown varying results. In addition, infected surgical sites preclude their use. Currently, there are limited outcome data for cryopreserved saphenous vein use in regard to long-term patency and limb salvage rates.
Saphenous vein graft intervention: status report 2014
Saphenous vein graft intervention: status report 2014Soverow J, Lee MS. 06 December 2014
J Invasive Cardiol. 2014 Dec;26(12):659-67.
Given their frequent use as bypass conduits and high rates of degeneration, saphenous vein grafts (SVGs) will continue to require percutaneous coronary intervention. Due to their unique physiology, SVGs pose special challenges to the interventionalist. Preintervention evaluation of hemodynamic significance is hampered by limited data and uncertainty regarding the validity of fractional flow reserve. Intraprocedural complications, particularly distal embolization and no-reflow, are common but may be mitigated by various techniques. Despite advances in the field, SVG intervention is associated with worse outcomes - including increased rates of periprocedural myocardial infarction, restenosis, target vessel revascularization, non-target disease progression, and death - compared with native vessel intervention. This paper reviews the most recent data and techniques available to the interventionalist seeking to improve outcomes after SVG intervention.Download abstract