Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Vascular Prostheses

  • Chapter
Book cover The Bionic Human

  • 1364 Accesses

Abstract

The progression of atherosclerosis is often relentless and, despite the numerous treatment options, recurrent disease is common. Vascular prosthetic implants are prone to failure, resulting in significant morbidity, cost, discomfort, and inconvenience for the patient. Surveillance protocols of vascular prostheses (grafts, stents, stent-grafts, etc.) have been developed to identify graft-threatening lesions (e.g., stenosis, aneurysmal degeneration) before the onset of graft failure. There is ample scientific evidence that vascular prosthetic surveillance is a clinically useful and cost-effective tool after most conventional vascular prostheses are placed. Percutaneous procedures have not yet been demonstrated to be superior or even equivalent to open surgical techniques, as measured by long-term results, but the minimally invasive nature of percutaneous interventions has led to significant reductions in early morbidity and mortality rates. Hence, percutaneous endovascular interventions are particularly attractive in selected patients. There are separate surveillance procedures for each type of therapy. The costs of the various procedures/methods for following these vascular patients must be considered. We recognize that reimbursement rates for follow-up tests vary among regions. Our recommendations are based on sound conservative medical practices and not on reimbursement patterns.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Davis MG, Feeley TM, O’Mally MK, et al. Infrainguinal polytetrafluoroethylene grafts: saved limbs or wasted effort? A report on 10 years’ experience. Ann Vasc Surg 1991;5:519–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Veith FJ, Gupta SK, Ascer E, et al. Six year prospective multicenter randomized comparison of autologous saphenous vein and expanded polytetrafluoroethylene in infrainguinal arterial reconstruction. J Vasc Surg 1986;3:104–114.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Medical Data International, Market and Technology Report, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Berger K, Sauvage LR, Rao AM, et al. Healing of arterial prostheses in man: its incompleteness. Ann Surg 1972;175:118–127.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Sauvage LR, Berger K, Beilen LB, et al. Presence of endothelium in an axillary femoral graft of knitted Dacron with an external velour surface. Ann Surg 1975;186:749–757.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Ross R. Pathogenesis of atherosclerosis: an update. New Engl J Med 1986;314:488–500.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Clowes AW, Kohler T. Graft endothelialization: the role of angiogenic mechanisms. J Vasc Surg 1991;13:734–736.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Greisler HP. Vascular graft healing: interfacial phenomena. In: Greisler HP, ed. New biologic and synthetic vascular prostheses. Austin, TX: RG Landes, 1991, pp. 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Mondy JS, Williams JK, Adams MR, et al. Structural determinants of lumen narrowing after angioplasty in atherosclerotic nonhuman primates. J Vasc Surg 1997;26:875–883.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Scott NA, Cipolla GD, Ross CE, et al. Identification of a potential role for the adventitia in vascular lesion formation after balloon overstretch injury of porcine coronary arteries. Circulation 1996;93:2178–2187.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. McArthur C, Teodorescu V, Eisen L, et al. Histopathologic analysis of endovascular stent grafts from patients with aortic aneurysms: Does healing occur? J Vasc Surg 2001;33:733–738.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Marin ML, Veith FJ, Cynamon J, et al. Human transluminally placed endovascular stented grafts: Preliminary histopathologic analysis of healing grafts in aortoiliac and femoral artery occlusive disease. J Vasc Surg 1995;21:595–603.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Gentile AT, Mills JL, Gooden MA, et al. Identification of predictors for lower extremity vein graft stenosis. Am J Surg 1997;174:218–221.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. DePalma RG. Atherosclerosis in vascular grafts. Atheroscler Rev 1979;6:146.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Bunt TJ. Synthetic vascular graft infections. I graft infections. Surgery 1983;93:733–746.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. O’Brien T, Collin J. Prosthetic vascular graft infection. Br J Surg 1992;79:1262–1267.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Bandyk DF, Esses GE. Prosthetic graft infection. Surg Clin NA 1994;74:571–590.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. van Himbeek FJ, van Knippenberg LA, Niessen MC, van Greithuysen AJ. Wound infection after arterial surgical procedures. Eur J Vasc Surg 1992;6:494–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Bandyk DF. Infection in prosthetic vascular grafts. In: Rutherford RB. Vascular surgery. Philadelphia, PA: W.B. Saunders, 2000, pp. 733–751.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Bergamini TM. Vascular prostheses infection caused by bacterial biofilms. Semin Vasc Surg 1990;3:101–109.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Vinard E, Eloy R, Descotes J, et al. Human vascular graft failure and frequency of infection. J Biomed Mater Res 1991;25:499–513.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Bandyk DF, Berni GA, Thiele BL, et al. Aortofemoral graft infection due to Staphylococcus epidermidis. Arch Surg 1984;119:102–108.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Stansby G, Byrne MT, Hamilton G. Dental infection in vascular surgical patients. Br J Surg 1994;81:1119–1120.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Buchbinder D, Leather R, Shah D, et al. Pathologic interactions between prosthetic aortic grafts and the gastrointestinal tract. Am J Surg 1980;140:192–198.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Champion MC, Sullivan SN, Coles JC, et al. Aortoenteric fistula: Incidence, presentation, recognition, and management. Ann Surg 1982;3:314–317.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Nunn DB, Carter MM, Donohue MT, et al. Postoperative dilation of knitted Dacron aortic bifurcation graft. J Vasc Surg 1990;12:291–297.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Watanabe T, Kusaba A, Kuma H, et al. Failure of Dacron arterial prostheses caused by structural defects. J Cardiovasc Surg 1983;24:95–100.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Nunn DB. Structural failure of Dacron arterial grafts. Sem Vasc Surg 1999;12:83–91.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Guidon R, Marois Y, Douville Y, et al. First generation aortic endografts: analysis of explanted Stentor devices from the Eurostar Registry. J Endovasc Ther 2000;7:105–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. American Heart Association: Heart and stroke statistical update. Dallas, TX, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Timsit SG, Sacco RL, Mohr JP, et al. Early clinical differentiation from severe atherosclerotic stenosis and cardioembolism. Stroke 1991;23:486–491.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Zwiebel WJ. Spectrum analysis in carotid sonography. Ultrason Med Biol 1987;13:625–636.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. O’Donnell TF, Erdoes L, Mackey WC, et al. Correlation of B-mode ultrasound imaging and arteriography with pathologic findings at carotid endarterectomy. Arch Surg 1985;120:443–449.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Strandness DE Jr. Angiography before carotid endarterectomy-no. Arch Neurol 1995;52:832–833.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Ricci MA. The changing role of duplex scan in the management of carotid bifurcation disease and endarterectomy. Sem Vasc Surg 1998;11:3–11.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial Collaborators: Beneficial effect of carotid endarterectomy in symptomatic patients with high grade carotid stenosis. N Engl J Med 1991;325:445–453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Executive Committee for the Asymptomatic Carotid Atherosclerosis Study: Endarterectomy for asymptomatic carotid stenosis. JAMA 1995;273:1421–1428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Healy DA, Clowes AW, Zierler RE, et al. Immediate and long-term results of carotid endarterectomy. Stroke 1989;20:1138–1142.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Nicholls SC, Phillips DJ, Bergelin RO, et al. Carotid endarterectomy: relationship of outcome to early restenosis. J Vasc Surg 1985;2:375–381.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Clagett GP, Robinowitz M, Youkey JR, et al. Morphogenesis and clinicopathologic characteristics of recurrent carotid disease. J Vasc Surg 1986;3:10–23.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Kasirajan K, Cornu-Labat G, Turner JJ, et al. Electron microscopic luminal surface characteristics of carotid plaques. Vasc Surg 1997;6:769.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Strandness DE Jr. Screening for carotid disease and surveillance for carotid restenosis. Sem Vasc Surg 2001;14:200–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Mackey WC, Belkin M, Sindi R, et al. Routine postendarterectomy duplex surveillance. Does it prevent later stroke? J Vasc Surg 1992;16:34.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Ricotta JJ, O’Brien MS, DeWeese JA. Natural history of recurrent and residual stenosis after carotid endarterectomy: Implications for postoperative surveillance and surgical management. Surgery 1992;112:656–663.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Lai SM, Duncan PW, Keighley J. Prediction of functional outcome after stroke; comparison of the Orpington prognostic scale and the NIH stroke scale. Stroke 1998;29:1838–1842.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Incidence and Prevalence Data, 1999, USRDS, http://www.usrds.org

  47. Mayers JD, Markell MS, Cohen LS, et al. Vascular access surgery for maintenance hemodialysis: variables in hospital stay. ASA 1992;10J38:113.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Brescia M, Cimino J, Appel K, et al. Chronic hemodialysis using venipuncture and a surgically created arteriovenous fistula. N Engl J Med 1966;275:1089–1092.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Harland RC. Placement of permanent vascular access devices: Surgical considerations. Adv Ren Replace Ther 1994;1:99–105.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Palder SB, Kirkman RL, Whittemore AD, et al. Vascular access for hemodialysis: patency rates and results of revision. Ann Surg 1985;202:235–239.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Cinat ME, Hopkins J, Wilson SE. A prospective evaluation of PTFE graft patency and surveillance techniques in hemodialysis access. Ann Vasc Surg 1999;13:191–198.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Sands JJ, Miranda CL. Prolongation of hemodialysis access survival with elective revision. Clin Nephrol 1995;44:329–333.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Safa AA, Valji K, Roberts AC, et al. Detection and treatment of dysfunctional hemodialysis access grafts: Effect of a surveillance program on graft patency and incidence of thrombosis. Radiology 1996;199:653–657.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Besarab A, Sullivan KL, Ross RP, et al. Utility of intra-access pressure monitoring in detecting and correcting venous outlet stenosis prior to thrombosis. Kidney Int 1995;47:1364–1373.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Schwab S, Besarab A, Beathard G, et al. NKF-DOQI clinical practice guidelines for vascular access. Am J Kidney Dis 1997;30(suppl 3):S150–S191.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Schwab SJ, Raymond JR, Saeed M, et al. Prevention of hemodialysis fistula thrombosis: Early detection of venous stenosis. Kidney Int 1989;36:707–711.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Sullivan KL, Besarab A. Hemodynamic screening and early percutaneous intervention reduce hemodialysis access thrombosis and increase graft longevity. J Vasc Interv Radiol 1997;8:163–170.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Trerotola SO, Scheel PJ, Powe NR, et al. Screening for access graft malfunction: comparison of physical examination with US. J Vasc Inf Radiol 1996;7:15–20.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Lumsden AB, MacDonald MJ, Kikeri D, et al. Cost efficacy of duplex surveillance and prophylactic angioplasty of arteriovenous ePTFE grafts. Ann Vasc Surg 1998;12:138–142.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. Dean RH, Screening and diagnosis of renovascular hypertension. In: Novick A, ed. Renovascular Disease. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders, 1996:225–233.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Rimmer JM, Gennari J. Atherosclerotic renovascular disease and progressive renal failure. Ann Intern Med 1993;118:712–719.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Weibull H, Bergvist D, Bergentz SE, et al. Percutaneous transluminal renal angioplasty versus surgical reconstruction of atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis: a prospective randomized study. J Vasc Surg 1993;8:841–850.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Harjai K, Khosla S, Shaw D, et al. Effect of gender on outcome following renal artery stent placement for renovascular hypertension. Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn 1997;42:381–386.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. White CJ, Ramel SR, Collins TJ, et al. Renal artery stent placement: Utility in lesions difficult to treat with balloon angioplasty. J Am Coll Cardiol 1997;30:1445–1450.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  65. Blum U, Krumme B, Flugel P, et al. Treatment of ostial renal artery stenosis with vascular endoprostheses after unsuccessful balloon angioplasty. N Engl J Med 1997;336:459–465.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  66. Ziegler RE. Is duplex scanning the best screening test for renal artery stenosis? Sem Vasc Surg 2001;14:177–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Dean RH, Tribble RW, Hansen KJ, et al. Evolution of renal insufficiency in ischemic nephropathy. Ann Surg 1991;213:446–456.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  68. Rees CR. Stents for atherosclerotic renovascular disease. JVIR 1999;10:689–705.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  69. Kasirajan K, O’Hara PJ, Gray BH, et al. Chronic mesenteric ischemia: open surgery vs. percutaneous angioplasty and stenting. J Vasc Surg 2001;33:63–71.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  70. Zwolak RM, Fillinger MF, Walsh DB, et al. Mesenteric and iliac duplex scanning: a validation study. J Vasc Surg 1998;27:1078–1088.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. Henry M, Amor M, Ethevenot G, et al. Palmaz stent placement in iliac and femoropopliteal arteries: Primary and secondary patency in 310 patients with 2–4 year follow-up. Radiol 1995;197:167–174.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  72. Ballard JL, Bergen JJ, Singh P, et al. Aortoiliac stent deployment versus surgical reconstruction: analysis of outcome and cost. J Vasc Surg 1998;28:94–103.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  73. Vorwerk D, Guenther RW, Schurmann K, et al. Late reobstruction in iliac arterial stents: Percutaneous treatment. Radiology 1995;197:479–483.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  74. Poulias GE, Doundoulakis N, Prombonas E, et al. Aortobifemoral bypass and determinants of early success and late favorable outcome: experience with 1000 consecutive cases. J Cardiovasc Surg 1992;33:664–678.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  75. Connolly JE, Kwaan JHM, McCart PM, et al. Aortoenteric fistula. Ann Surg 1981;194:402–412.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  76. Lafont A, Guzman LA, Whitlow PL, et al. Restenosis after experimental angioplasty: Intimal, medial, and adventitial changes associated with constrictive remodeling. Circ Res 1995;76:996–1002.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  77. Deaths: Final Data for 2000. National Vital Statistics Reports 50: No. 15, Sept 2002 http://www.cdc.gov

  78. Ernst CB, Rutkow IM, Cleveland RJ, et al. Vascular surgery in the United States. Report of the Joint Society for Vascular Surgery-International Society for Cardiovascular Surgery Committee on Vascular Surgical Manpower. J Vasc Surg 1987;6:611–621.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  79. Johnston KW. Canadian Society for Vascular Surgery Aneurysm Study Group: ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm: six year follow-up results of a multicenter prospective study. J Vasc Surg 1994;19:888–890.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  80. Harris PL. The highs and lows of endovascular aneurysm repair: the first two years of the Eurostar registry. Ann R Coll Surg Eng 1999;81:161–165.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  81. Bernhard VM, Mitchell RS, Matsumura JS, et al. Ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm after endovascular repair. J Vasc Surg 2002;35:1155–1162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Veith FJ, Baum RA, Ohki T, et al. Nature and significance of endoleaks and endotension: Summary of options expressed at an international conference. J Vasc Surg 2002;35:1029–1035.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Politz JK, Newman VS, Stewart MT. Late abdominal aortic aneurysm rupture after AneuRx repair: a report of 3 cases. J Vasc Surg 2000;31:599–606.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  84. Buth J. Early complications and endoleaks after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: report of a multicenter study. J Vasc Surg 2000;31:134–146.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  85. Zarins CK, White RA, Schwarten D, et al. AneuRx stent graft versus open surgical repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms: multicenter prospective clinical trial. J Vasc Surg 1999;29:292–308.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  86. Glozarian J, Dussaussois L, Abada HT, et al. Helical CT of aorta after endoluminal stentgraft therapy: Value of biphasic acquisition. AJR 1998;171:329–331.

    Google Scholar 

  87. Singh-Ranger R, McArthur T, Corte MD, et al. The abdominal aortic aneurysm sac after endoluminal exclusion: a medium-term morphologic follow-up based on volumetric technology. J Vasc Surg 2000;31:490–500.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  88. White GH, May J, Petrasek P, et al. Endotension: an explanation for continued AAA growth after successful endoluminal repair. J Endovasc Surg 1999;6:308–315.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  89. Gilling-Smith GL, Martin J, Sudhundran S, et al. Freedom from endoleak after endovascular aneurysm repair does not equal treatment success. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2000;19:421–425.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  90. White GH, Weiyun Y, May J, et al. Endoleak as a complication of endoluminal grafting of abdominal aortic aneurysms: classification, incidence, diagnosis, and management. J Endovasc Surg 1997;4:152–168.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  91. Wolf YG, Johnson BL, Hill BB, et al. Duplex ultrasound scanning vs. computed tomographic angiography for postoperative evaluation of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg 2000;32:1142–1148.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  92. McDaniel MD, Cronenwett JL. Basic data related to the natural history of intermittent claudication. Ann Vasc Surg 1989;3:273–277.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  93. Kannel WB, McGee DL. Update on some epidemiologic features of intermittent claudication: the Framingham study. J Am Geriatr Soc 1985;33:13–18.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  94. Murabito JM, D’Agostino RB, Silbershatz H, Wilson PWF. Intermittent claudication: a risk profile from the Framingham Heart Study. Circulation 1997;96:44–49.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  95. Imparato AM, Kim GE, Davidson T, et al. Intermittent claudication: Its natural course. Surgery 1975;78:795–801.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  96. Bandyk DF, Schmitt DD, Seabrook GR, et al. Monitoring functional patency of in situ saphenous vein bypasses: The impact of a surveillance protocol and elective revision. J Vasc Surg 1989;9:286–296.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  97. Erickson CA, Towne JB, Seabrook GR, et al. Ongoing surveillance of vascular laboratory surveillance is essential to maximize long term in situ saphenous vein bypass patency. J Vasc Surg 1996;23:18–26.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  98. Szilagyi DE, Elliott JP, Hageman JH, et al. Biological fate of autogenous vein implants as arterial substitutes: Clinical, angiographic, and histopathologic observations in femoropopliteal operations for atherosclerosis. Ann Surg 1978;178:232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  99. O’Mara CS, Flinn WR, Gupta SK, et al. Recognition and surgical management of patent but hemodynamically failed arterial grafts. Ann Surg 1981;193:467.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  100. Sanchez LA, Suggs WD, Marin ML, Veith FJ. Is percutaneous balloon angioplasty appropriate in the treatment of graft and anastomotic lesions responsible for failing vein bypasses? Am J Surg 1994;168:97–101.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  101. Bergamini TM, George SM, Massey HT, et al. Intensive surveillance of femoropoplitealtibial autogenous vein bypasses improves long term graft patency and limb salvage. Ann Surg 1995;221:507–516.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  102. Sanchez L, Gupta SK, Veith FJ, et al. A ten year experience with 150 failing or threatened vein and polytetrafluoroethylene arterial bypass grafts. J Vasc Surg 1991;14:729–738.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  103. Whittemore AD, Clowes AW, Couch NP, et al. Secondary femoropopliteal reconstruction. Ann Surg 1981;193:35–42.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  104. Wilson YG, Davies AH, Currie IC, et al. Vein graft stenosis: Incidence and intervention. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 1996;11:164–169.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  105. Panetta TF, Marin ML, Veith FJ, et al. Unsuspected pre-existing saphenous vein disease: an unrecognized cause of vein bypass failure. J Vasc Surg 1991;15:102–112.

    Google Scholar 

  106. Collier P, Ascer E, Veith FJ, et al. Acute thrombosis of arterial grafts. In: Bergan JJ, Yao JST, eds. Vascular surgical emergencies. New York: Grune & Stratton, 1987, pp. 517–528.

    Google Scholar 

  107. Gupta AK, Bandyk DF, Cheanvachai D, Johnson BL. Natural history of infrainguinal vein graft stenosis relative to bypass grafting technique. J Vasc Surg 1997;25:211–225.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  108. Mills, JL. Infrainguinal vein graft surveillance: How and when. Sem Vasc Surg 2001;14:169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  109. Kerlan RK, LaBerge JM, Gordon RL, Ring EJ. TIPS: current status. AJR Am J Roentg 1995;164:1059.

    Google Scholar 

  110. Martin M, Zajko AB, Orons PD, et al. Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt in the management of variceal bleeding: indications and clinical results. Surgery 1993;114:719–727.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  111. LaBerge JM, Somberg KA, Lake JR, et al. Two-year outcome following transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt for variceal bleeding: results in 90 patients. Gastroenterol 1995;108:1143–1151.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  112. LaBerge JM, Ferrell LD, Ring EJ, et al. Histopathologic study of stenotic and occluded transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts. JVIR 1993;4:779–786.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  113. Nishimine K, Saxon RR, Kichikawa K, et al. Improved transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt patency with PTFE-covered stent-grafts: experimental results in swine. Radiology 1995;196:341–347.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  114. Haskal ZJ, Pentecost MJ, Soulen MC, et al. Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt stenosis and revision: early and midterm results. AJR Am J Roentg 1994;163:439–444.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Vascular Surgery, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA

    Karthikeshwar Kasirajan MD

  2. Division of Vascular Surgery, University of New Mexico School of Medicine, Albuquerque, NM

    Brian Matteson MD, John Marek MD & Mark Langsfeld MD

Authors
  1. Karthikeshwar Kasirajan MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Brian Matteson MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. John Marek MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mark Langsfeld MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Saint Louis University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO

    Frank E. Johnson MD  & Katherine S. Virgo PhD  & 

  2. Scott and White Hospital, Texas A & M University System Health Sciences Center College of Medicine, Temple, TX

    Terry C. Lairmore MD

  3. University of Liverpool, UK

    Riccardo A. Audisio MD, FRCS

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2006 Humana Press Inc., Totowa, NJ

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Kasirajan, K., Matteson, B., Marek, J., Langsfeld, M. (2006). Vascular Prostheses. In: Johnson, F.E., Virgo, K.S., Lairmore, T.C., Audisio, R.A. (eds) The Bionic Human. Humana Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-59259-975-2_33

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation