Drummond MF, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes . Oxford: Oxford Medical Publications , 1987.
4.
Robison JG, Elliott BMDoes postoperative surveillance with duplex scanning identify the failing distal bypass?Ann Vasc Surg5:182-185, 1991.
5.
Berkowitz HD , Greenstein S., Barker CF, et al. Late failure of reversed vein bypass grafts. Ann Surg210:782-786, 1989.
6.
Berkowitz HD , Greenstein SMImproved patency in reversed femoral-infrapopliteal autogenous vein grafts bv early detection and treatment of the failing graft . J Vasc Surg5:755-761, 1987.
7.
Szilagyi DE, Elliott JP, Hageman JH, et al. Biologic fate of autogenous vein implants as arterial substitutes: Clinical, angiographic, and histopathologic observations in femoropopliteal operations for atherosclerosis. Ann Surg178:232-246, 1973.
8.
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 Surg9:286-296, 1989.
9.
Green RM, McNamara J., Ouriel K., et al. Comparison of infrainguinal graft surveillance techniques. J Vasc Surg11:207-215, 1990.
10.
Lundell A. , Lindblad B., Bergqvist D., et al. Femoropoliteal-crural graft patency is improved by an intensive surveillance program: A prospective randomized study. J Vasc Surg21: 26-34, 1995.
11.
Bandyk DF, Bergamini TM, Towne JB, et al. Durability of vein graft revision: A comparison of secondary procedures. J Vasc Surg13:200-210, 1991.
12.
Sanchez LA, Gupta SK, Veith FJ, et al. A ten-year experience with one hundred fifty failing or threatened vein and polytetrafluoroethylene arterial bypass grafts. J Vasc Surg14: 729-738, 1991.
13.
Cohen JR, Mannick JA, Couch NP, et al. Recognition and management of impending vein-graft failure. Arch Surg121:758-759, 1986.
14.
Whittemore AD, Clowes AW, Couch NP, et al. Secondary femoropopliteal reconstruction . Ann Surg193:35-42, 1981.
15.
Taylor PR, Wolfe JJN, Tyrrell MR, et al. Graft stenosis: Justification for 1 year surveillance. Br J Surg77:1125-1128, 1990 .
16.
Bergamini TM , Towne JB, Bandyk DF, et al. Experience of the eighty's with in situ saphenous vein bypasses: Determinant factors of long-term patencyJ Vasc Surg13: 137-149, 1991.
17.
Perler BA, Osterman FA, Mitchell SE, et al. Balloon dilatation versus surgical revision of infrainguinal autogenous vein graft stenoses: Long-term follow-up. J Cardiovasc Surg31: 656-661, 1990.
18.
Belkin M., Mackey WC, McLaughlin R., et al. The variation in vein graft flow velocity with luminal diameter and outflow level. J Vasc Surg15:991-999, 1992.
19.
Ascer E., Collier P., Gupta SK, et al. Reoperation for polytetrafluoroethylene bypass failure: The importance of distal outflow site and operative technique in determining outcome . J Vasc Surg5:298-310, 1987.
20.
Belkin M., Raftery KB, Mackey WC, et al. A prospective study of the determinants of vein graft flow velocity: Implications for graft surveillance. J Vasc Surg19:259-267, 1994.
21.
Chang BB, Leather RP, Kaufman JL, et al. Hemodynamic characteristics of failing infrainguinal in situ vein bypass. J Vasc Surg12:596-600, 1990.
22.
Mills JL, Harris EJ, Taylor LM Jr, et al. The importance of routine surveillance of distal bypass grafts with duplex scanning: A study of 379 reversed vein grafts. J Vasc Surg12: 379-389, 1990.
23.
Brothers TE , Robison JG, Morgan M., et al. Interpretation of low graft flow velocity: Does measurement of graft flow volume improve accuracy for postoperative surveillance?Presented at the Peripheral Vascular Surgery Society . Breckenridge : January 27, 1995.
24.
Brothers TE , Rachima R., Elliott BM, et al. Utility assessment for postoperative graft surveillance. Surg Forum47, (in press).
25.
Bartlett ST , Olinde AJ, Flinn WR, et al. The reoperative potential of infrainguinal bypass: Long-term limb and patient survival. J Vasc Surg5:170-179, 1987.
26.
Gardiner GA , Harrington DP, Koltun W., et al. Salvage of occluded arterial bypass grafts by means of thrombolysis. J Vasc Surg9:426-431, 1989.
27.
Strandness DE, Carter SAOutcome criteria in patients with peripheral arterial disease. Ann Vasc Surg7:491, 1993,.
28.
Abou-Zamzam AM , Lee RW, Porter JMFunctional outcome following infrainguinal bypass for limb salvage. Presented at the North American Chapter, International Society for Cardiovascular Surgery Meeting . Chicago, III.: June 10, 1996 .
29.
Ware JE, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36). 1. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care30:473, 1992.
30.
Duggan MM, Woodson J., Scott TE, et al. Functional outcomes in limb salvage vascular surgery. Am J Surg168:188, 1994.
31.
Schneider JR , McHomey CA, Malenka DJ, et al. Functional health and well-being in patients with severe atherosclerotic peripheral vascular occlusive disease . Ann Vase Surg7:419, 1993.
32.
Spitzer WO , Dobson AJ, Hall J., et al. Measuring the quality of life of cancer patients: A concise QL-INDEX for use by physicians. J Chronic Dis31:585, 1981.
33.
Albers M., Fratezi AC, Deluccia N.Assessment of quality of life of patients with severe ischemia as a result of infrainguinal arterial occlusive disease. J Vasc Surg16:54, 1992.