Advertisement

Endoscopic Saphenous Vein and Radial Artery Harvesting

  • Fabrizio Rosati
  • Gianluigi BisleriEmail author
Chapter
  • 10 Downloads

Abstract

Over the past decade, there has been an increased adoption of minimally invasive techniques for saphenous vein and radial artery procurement during coronary artery bypass surgery. Endoscopic approaches for vessel harvesting offer consistent advantages when compared to conventional “open” techniques in terms of neurological and wound complications, pain reduction and patients’ satisfaction. While concerns had been raised initially regarding conduit quality and potential damage occurring with an endoscopic approach and thereby potentially affecting the longevity of the graft itself, there is ample evidence in literature about similar survival outcomes and cardiac-related events at mid and long-term follow-up when compared to an open technique. Different strategies (sealed vs non-sealed) are nowadays available for endoscopic conduit harvesting and available evidence validates the safety and efficacy of the approach. Endoscopic harvesting techniques can be safely adopted as a standard of care for grafts procurement in patients undergoing multivessel coronary artery revascularization.

Keywords

Endoscopic vein harvesting Graft patency Open vein harvesting Wound healing Wound infection 

References

  1. 1.
    Ferdinand FD, MacDonald JK, Balkhy HH, et al. Endoscopic conduit harvest in coronary artery bypass grafting surgery: an ISMICS systematic review and consensus conference statements. Innovations. 2017;12:301–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bisleri G, Muneretto C. Endoscopic saphenous vein and radial harvest: state-of-the-art. Curr Opin Cardiol. 2015;30:624–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bisleri G, Moggi A, Muneretto C. Endoscopic vessel harvesting: good or bad? Curr Opin Cardiol. 2013;28:666–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kaplan S, Morgan JA, Bisleri G, et al. Effects of resveratrol in storage solution on adhesion molecule expression and nitric oxide synthesis in vein grafts. Ann Thorac Surg. 2005;80:1773–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Desai P, Kiani S, Thiruvanthan N, et al. Impact of the learning curve for endoscopic vein harvest on conduit quality and early graft patency. Ann Thorac Surg. 2011;91:1385–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Aziz O, Athanasiou T, Darzi A. Minimally invasive conduit harvesting: a systematic review. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2006;29:324–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Krishnamoorthy B, Critchley WR, Glover AT, et al. A randomized study comparing three groups of vein harvesting methods for coronary artery bypass grafting: endoscopic harvest versus standard bridging and open techniques. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2012;15:224–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Aziz O, Athanasiou T, Panesar SS, et al. Does minimally invasive vein harvesting technique affect the quality of the conduit for coronary revascularization? Ann Thorac Surg. 2005;80:2407–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Griffith GL, Allen KB, Waller BF, et al. Endoscopic and traditional saphenous vein harvest: a histologic comparison. Ann Thorac Surg. 2000;69:520–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Meyer DM, Rogers TE, Jessen ME, Estrera AS, Chin AK. Histologic evidence of the safety of endoscopic saphenous vein graft preparation. Ann Thorac Surg. 2000;70:487–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hussaini BE, Xiu-Gui L, Wolfe JA, Thatte HS. Evaluation of endoscopic vein extraction on structural and functional viability of saphenous vein endothelium. J Cardiothorac Surg. 2011;6:82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Brown EN, Kon ZN, Tran R, et al. Strategies to reduce intraluminal clot formation in endoscopically harvested saphenous veins. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2007;134:1259–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rousou LJ, Taylor KB, Lu XG, et al. Saphenous vein conduits harvested by endoscopic technique exhibit structural and functional damage. Ann Thorac Surg. 2009;87:62–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Patel AN, Henry AC, Hunnicutt C, Cockerham CA, Willey B, Urschel HC. Endoscopic radial artery harvesting is better than the open technique. Ann Thorac Surg. 2004;78:149–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bisleri G, Muneretto C. Endoscopic radial artery harvesting. In: European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, editor. Multimedia manual of cardiothoracic surgery. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2009.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Shapira OM, Eskenazi BR, Anter E, et al. Endoscopic versus conventional radial artery harvest for coronary artery bypass grafting: functional and histologic assessment of the conduit. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2006;131:388–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Medalion B, Tobar A, Yosibash Z, et al. Vasoreactivity and histology of the radial artery: comparison of open versus endoscopic approaches. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2008;34:845–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Burris NS, Brown EN, Grant M, et al. Optical coherence tomography imaging as a quality assurance tool for evaluating endoscopic harvest of the radial artery. Ann Thorac Surg. 2008;85:1271–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lopes RD, Hafley GE, et al. Endoscopic versus open vein-graft harvesting in coronary-artery bypass surgery. N Engl J Med. 2009;361:235–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Zenati MA, Shroyer AL, Collins JF, et al. Impact of endoscopic versus open saphenous vein harvest technique on late coronary artery bypass grafting patient outcomes in the ROOBY (Randomized On/Off Bypass) Trial. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2011;141:338–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bisleri G, Muneretto C. Letter by Bisleri and Muneretto regarding article, “Saphenous vein graft failure after coronary artery bypass surgery: insights from PREVENT IV”. Circulation. 2015;132:e28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Dimitrova KR, Dincheva GR, Hoffman DM, DeCastro H, Geller CM, Tranbaugh RF. Results of endoscopic radial artery harvesting in 1577 patients. Innovations. 2013;8:398–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Burns DJ, Swinamer SA, Fox SA, et al. Long-term patency of endoscopically harvested radial arteries: from a randomized controlled trial. Innovations. 2015;10:77–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Goldsborough MA, Miller MH, Gibson J, et al. Prevalence of leg wound complications after coronary artery bypass grafting: determination of risk factors. Am J Crit Care. 1999;8:149–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Allen KB, Griffith GL, Heimansohn DA, et al. Endoscopic versus traditional saphenous vein harvesting: a prospective, randomized trial. Ann Thorac Surg. 1998;66:26–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Bitondo JM, Daggett WM, Torchiana DF, et al. Endoscopic versus open saphenous vein harvest: a comparison of postoperative wound complications. Ann Thorac Surg. 2002;73:523–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Bonde P, Graham AN, MacGowan SW. Endoscopic vein harvest: advantages and limitations. Ann Thorac Surg. 2004;77:2076–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Andreasen JJ, Nekrasas V, Dethlefsen C. Endoscopic vs open saphenous vein harvest for coronary artery bypass grafting: a prospective randomized trial. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2008;34:384–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Au WK, Chiu SW, Sun MP, et al. Improved leg wound healing with endoscopic saphenous vein harvest in coronary artery bypass graft surgery: a prospective randomized study in Asian population. J Card Surg. 2008;23:633–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Schultz SC, Stapleton D, D’Ambra P, et al. Prospective randomized study comparing the Teleflex Medical SaphLITE Retractor to the Ethicon CardioVations Clearglide Endoscopic System. J Cardiothorac Surg. 2006;1:24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Yun KL, Wu Y, Aharonian V, et al. Randomized trial of endoscopic versus open vein harvest for coronary artery bypass grafting: six-month patency rates. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2005;129:496–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Perrault LP, Jeanmart H, Bilodeau L, et al. Early quantitative coronary angiography of saphenous vein grafts for coronary artery bypass grafting harvested by means of open versus endoscopic saphenectomy: a prospective randomized trial. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2004;127:1402–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Allen KB, Heimansohn DA, Robison RJ, et al. Influence of endoscopic versus traditional saphenectomy on event-free survival: five-year follow-up of a prospective randomized trial. Heart Surg Forum. 2003;6:E143–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Bonde P, Graham A, MacGowan S. Endoscopic vein harvest: early results of a prospective trial with open vein harvest. Heart Surg Forum. 2002;5(Suppl 4):S378–91.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Schurr UP, Lachat ML, Reuthebuch O, et al. Endoscopic saphenous vein harvesting for CABG – a randomized, prospective trial. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2002;50:160–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Kiaii B, Moon BC, Massel D, et al. A prospective randomized trial of endoscopic versus conventional harvesting of the saphenous vein in coronary artery bypass surgery. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2002;123:204–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Hayward TZ 3rd, Hey LA, Newman LL, et al. Endoscopic versus open saphenous vein harvest: the effect on postoperative outcomes. Ann Thorac Surg. 1999;68:2107–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Bisleri G, Giroletti L, Hrapkowicz T, et al. Five-year clinical outcome of endoscopic versus open radial artery harvesting: a propensity score analysis. Ann Thorac Surg. 2016;102:1253–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Bisleri G, Giroletti L, Stefini R, Guarneri B, Muneretto C. Neurological study of radial nerve conduction during endoscopic radial artery harvesting: an intra-operative evaluation. J Cardiothorac Med. 2014;2:207–9.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Allen K, Cheng D, Cohn W, et al. Endoscopic vascular harvest in coronary artery bypass grafting surgery: a consensus statement of the International Society of Minimally Invasive Cardiothoracic Surgery (ISMICS) 2005. Innovations. 2005;1:51–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Samano N, Geijer H, Liden M, Fremes S, Bodin L, Souza D. The no-touch saphenous vein for coronary artery bypass grafting maintains a patency, after 16 years, comparable to the left internal thoracic artery: a randomized trial. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2015;150:880–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Cardiac Surgery, Kingston Health Sciences CentreQueen’s UniversityKingstonCanada

Personalised recommendations