title: Distal anastomotic vein adjunct usage in infrainguinal prosthetic bypasses.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  Single-segment saphenous vein remains the optimal conduit for infrainguinal revascularization. In its absence, prosthetic conduit may be used. Existing data regarding the significance of anastomotic distal vein adjunct (DVA) usage with prosthetic grafts are based on small series.
  
  
  METHODS
  This is a retrospective cohort analysis derived from the regional Vascular Study Group of New England as well as the Brigham and Women's hospital database. A total of 1018 infrainguinal prosthetic bypass grafts were captured in the dataset from 73 surgeons at 15 participating institutions. Propensity scoring and 3:1 matching was performed to create similar exposure groups for analysis. Outcome measures of interest included: primary patency, freedom from major adverse limb events (MALEs), and amputation free survival at 1 year as a function of vein patch utilization. Time to event data were compared with the log-rank test; multivariable Cox proportional hazard models were used to evaluate the adjusted association between vein cuff usage and the primary end points. DVA was defined as a vein patch, cuff, or boot in any configuration.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Of the 1018 bypass operations, 94 (9.2%) had a DVA whereas 924 (90.8%) did not (no DVA). After propensity score matching, 88 DVAs (25%) and 264 no DVAs (75%) were analyzed. On univariate analysis of the matched cohort, the DVA and no DVA groups were similar in terms of mean age (70.0 vs 69.0; P = .55), male sex (58.0% vs 58.3%; P > .99), and preoperative characteristics such as living at home (93.2% vs 94.3%; P = .79) and independent ambulatory status (72.7% vs 75.7%; P = .64). The DVA and no DVA groups had similar rates of major comorbidities such as hypertension chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes mellitus, coronary artery disease, and dialysis dependence (P > .05 for all). Likewise, they had similar rates of distal origin grafts (13.6% vs 12.5%; P = .85), critical limb ischemia indications (P = .53), and prior arterial bypass (58% vs 47%; P = .08). The DVA group had a higher rate of completion angiogram performed (55.7% vs 37.5%; P =.002) and were more likely to be discharged on coumadin (53.4% vs 37.1%; P =.01). By multivariable analysis, use of a distal DVA was protective against MALEs (hazard ratio, 0.36; 95% confidence interval, 0.14-0.90; P = .03).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  This contemporary multi-institutional propensity-matched study demonstrates that patients that receive distal anastomotic vein adjuncts as part of infrainguinal prosthetic bypass operations in general have more extreme comorbidities and more technically challenging operations based on level of target vessel and prior bypass attempts. After propensity-matched analysis, the use of a DVA may protect against MALEs in prosthetic bypass surgery and should be considered when feasible.
authors: Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. James.mcphee@bmc.org
authors: James T
authors: JT
authors: McPhee
authors: Philip P
authors: PP
authors: Goodney
authors: Andres
authors: A
authors: Schanzer
authors: Shimon
authors: S
authors: Shaykevich
authors: Michael
authors: M
authors: Belkin
authors: Matthew T
authors: MT
authors: Menard
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D000671:Amputation, Surgical; D019917:Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000379:methods* / Q000401:mortality; D016009:Chi-Square Distribution; D015897:Comorbidity; D018572:Disease-Free Survival; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D053208:Kaplan-Meier Estimate; D023821:Limb Salvage; D035002:Lower Extremity / Q000098:blood supply*; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D015999:Multivariate Analysis; D009511:New England; D058729:Peripheral Arterial Disease / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000401:mortality / Q000601:surgery*; D011183:Postoperative Complications / Q000209:etiology / Q000601:surgery; D057216:Propensity Score; D016016:Proportional Hazards Models; D012042:Registries; D012086:Reoperation; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D018570:Risk Assessment; D012307:Risk Factors; D013997:Time Factors; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D014680:Veins / Q000601:surgery
references: Br J Surg. 1986 Oct;73(10):823-5
references: 3768656
references: Semin Vasc Surg. 1995 Sep;8(3):202-8
references: 8564033
references: J Vasc Surg. 2010 Sep;52(3):616-23
references: 20615645
references: Ann Vasc Surg. 2004 Mar;18(2):199-206
references: 15253256
references: J Vasc Surg. 2012 Apr;55(4):1008-14
references: 22365176
references: J Vasc Surg. 2002 Jun;35(6):1085-92
references: 12042718
references: J Vasc Surg. 2000 May;31(5):1008-17
references: 10805893
references: J Vasc Surg. 2007 Dec;46(6):1160-6
references: 17920227
references: J Vasc Surg. 1997 Sep;26(3):517-38
references: 9308598
references: J Vasc Surg. 2000 Apr;31(4):696-701
references: 10753277
references: J Vasc Surg. 1997 Oct;26(4):543-50
references: 9357453
references: J Vasc Surg. 2009 Dec;50(6):1462-73.e1-3
references: 19897335
references: J Vasc Surg. 1997 Dec;26(6):919-24; discussion 925-7
references: 9423706
references: Am J Surg. 1987 May;153(5):505-10
references: 3578671
references: Br J Surg. 1995 Apr;82(4):487-91
references: 7613892
references: Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2001 May;21(5):461-6
references: 11352524
references: Br J Surg. 2004 May;91(5):560-2
references: 15122605
references: J Vasc Surg. 2011 Jul;54(1):100-108.e4
references: 21334173
references: J Vasc Surg. 2001 Feb;33(2):266-71; discussion 271-2
references: 11174777
references: Cardiovasc Surg. 1998 Feb;6(1):19-26
references: 9546843
references: J Vasc Surg. 1995 Apr;21(4):558-64; discussion 564-6
references: 7707561
references: Control Clin Trials. 1993 Aug;14(4):296-307
references: 8365194
references: Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2010 Jun;39(6):747-54
references: 20236841
references: J Vasc Surg. 1995 Feb;21(2):282-93; discussion 293-5
references: 7853601
references: Ann Vasc Surg. 2009 Jan-Feb;23(1):24-31
references: 18657383
references: J Vasc Surg. 2007 Dec;46(6):1093-1101; discussion 1101-2
references: 17950568
references: Semin Vasc Surg. 2010 Sep;23(3):129-37
references: 20826289
references: Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1979 Jun;148(6):930
references: 156409
references: Aust N Z J Surg. 1984 Jun;54(3):283-5
references: 6380479
references: Br J Surg. 1992 Apr;79(4):348-54
references: 1576506
references: Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2001 Mar;21(3):251-60
references: 11352685