Advertisement

Femoropopliteal Bypasses to Isolated Popliteal Artery Segments: PTFE vs. Vein Grafts

  • Harry B. Kram
  • Sushil K. Gupta
  • Frank J. Veith
Conference paper

Abstract

A 10-year experience of 217 femoropopliteal bypasses (FPBs) to isolated popliteal artery (IPA) segments in 207 patients is reported. Thirty-three FPBs (15%) were performed with reversed saphenous vein (RSV) and 184 (85%) with polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) grafts. Operative indications were gangrene in 121 (56%), nonhealing ulceration in 40 (18%), ischemic rest pain in 51 (24%), and claudication in 5 (2%) cases. The 5-year primary graft patency rate of these bypasses was 59% (RSV = 74%, PTFE = 55%; p <0.05), the secondary 5-year graft patency rate was 61% (RSV = 79%, PTFE = 56%; p <0.05), and the 5-year limb salvage rate was 78% (RSV = 78%, PTFE = 78%). The 30-day operative mortality rate was 10% and the 5-year patient survival rate was 38%. Eleven patients (5%) required lower extremity amputation because of progressive gangrene or extensive infection despite a patent bypass to an IPA segment. Amputation was avoided in 23 patients (11%) by reoperation and secondary graft extension to an infrapopliteal artery with RSV. FPB to an IPA segment combined with graft extension to an infrapopliteal artery with RSV was performed as primary therapy in 19 (9%) patients because of extensive pedal necrosis or infection. We conclude that FPBs to IPA segments: 1) have acceptable 5-year graft patency and limb salvage rates; 2) should be performed with RSV grafts when possible; 3) may be performed with PTFE grafts if necessary, with a resulting limb salvage rate equal to that of RSV grafts; and 4) require sequential extension to an infrapopliteal artery when foot necrosis or infection is extensive. In addition, the presence of an IPA segment is associated with a high operative mortality rate and limited life expectancy due to coronary artery disease.

Keywords

Limb Salvage Popliteal Artery Graft Patency PTFE Graft Limb Salvage Rate 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Mannick JA, Jackson BT, Coffman JD, et al. Success of bypass vein grafts in patients with isolated popliteal artery segments. Surgery 1967;61:17–25.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Veith FJ, Gupta SK, Daly V. Femoropopliteal bypass to the isolated popliteal segment: Is polytetrafluoroethylene graft acceptable? Surgery 1981;89:296–303.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Purdy RT, Bole P, Makanju W, et al. Salvage of the ischemic lower extremity in patients with poor runoff. Arch Surg 1974;109:784–786.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Davis RC, Davies WT, Mannick JA. Bypass vein grafts in patients with distal popliteal artery occlusion. Am J Surg 1975;129:421–425.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kaufman JL, Whittemore AD, Couch NP, et al. The fate of bypass grafts to an isolated popliteal artery segment. Surgery 1982;92:1027–1031.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Corson JD, Brewster DC, LaSalle AJ, et al. Comparative analysis of vein and prosthetic bypass grafts to the isolated popliteal artery. Surgery 1982;91:448–451.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Veith FJ, Gupta SK, Samson RH, et al. Progress in limb salvage by reconstructive arterial surgery combined with new and improved adjunctive procedures. Ann Surg 1981;194:386–401.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gupta SK, Veith FJ. Fate of patients with a blind popliteal artery segment: Limb loss with a patent femoropopliteal graft. In: Veith FJ, ed., Critical Problems in Vascular Surgery. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1982, pp. 241–250.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Brewster DC. Bypass to isolated popliteal artery segment. In: Bergan JJ, Yao JST, eds., Evaluation and Treatment of Upper and Lower Extremity Circulatory Disorders. Orlando: Grune & Stratton, 1984, pp. 337–349.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Darke S, Lamont P, Chant A, et al. Femoro-popliteal versus femoro-distal bypass grafting for limb salvage in patients with an “isolated” popliteal segment. Eur J Vasc Surg 1989;3:203–207.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Veith FJ, Gupta SK, Wengerter KR, et al. Changing arteriosclerotic disease patterns and management strategies in lower-limb-threatening ischemia. Ann Surg 1990;212:402–414.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Veith FJ, Gupta SK, Daly V. Management of early and late thrombosis of expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) femoropopliteal bypass grafts: Favorable prognosis with appropriate reoperation. Surgery 1980;87:581–587.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Veith FJ, Gupta SK, Ascer E, et al. Improved strategies for secondary operations on infrainguinal arteries. Ann Vasc Surg 1990;3:85–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Colton T. Statistics in Medicine. Boston: Little, Brown & Company, 1976, pp. 237–250.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mundth ED, Darling DC, Moran JM, et al. Quantitative correlation of distal arterial outflow and patency of femoropopliteal reversed saphenous vein grafts with intraoperative flows and pressure measurements. Surgery 1969;65:197–206.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Dean RH, Yao JST, Stanton PE, et al. Prognostic indicators in femoropopliteal artery occlusion. Arch Surg 1975;110:1287–1293.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hiatt JG, Raviola C, Baker JD, et al. The limitations of predictability of success of femoro-popliteal bypass grafts. J Vasc Surg 1984;1:617–622.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Veith FJ, Gupta SK, Ascer E, et al. Six-year prospective multicenter randomized comparison of autologous saphenous vein and expanded polytetrafluoroethylene grafts in infrainguinal arterial reconstructions. J Vasc Surg 1986;3:104–114.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mason R, Lanfranchi A, Giron F. Isolated popliteal versus distal bypasses for limb salvage. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1982;155:49–53.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wengerter KR, Veith FJ, Gupta SK, et al. Influence of vein size (diameter) on infrapopliteal reversed vein graft patency. J Vasc Surg 1990;11:525–531.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Dietzek AM, Gupta SK, Kram HB, et al. Limb loss with patent infra-inguinal bypasses. Eur J Vasc Surg 1990;4:413–417.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Harry B. Kram
  • Sushil K. Gupta
  • Frank J. Veith

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations