Minimally Invasive Vein Harvesting: A Comparison of Endoscopic Versus Traditional Open Saphenectomy

Abstract

The greater saphenous vein (SV) is the conduit of choice for coronary and infrapopliteal revascularization procedures. Unfortunately, to harvest an SV it is often necessary to make an incision the length of the leg, and this is associated with a significant incidence of wound complications. Minimally invasive procedures have several advantages including reduced incidence of wound complications, decreased hospital length of stay, and, therefore, health-care savings. Currently, little information is available that compares traditional open saphenectomy (OS) versus a minimally invasive procedure, endoscopic saphenectomy (ES). The purpose of this study was to compare SV harvest time, incision length, and harvested vein quality between the OS and ES techniques in six nonpreserved cadavers.

Each limb was randomly selected for either OS or ES. The length of incision, number of SV leaks after harvest, length of SV, and time required for harvest were recorded for each technique. (continued on next page)

The table summarizes the findings of the cadaver dissections.

Per limb, no difference was noted in vein harvest length or number of leaks between OS and ES. A significant reduction was found in incision length for ES (14.4 ±1.4 cm per limb), but the time required for OS was significantly shorter (P=0.01).

This study suggests an equivalent length of SV can be harvested with either OS or ES techniques; however, with the ES technique there is a reduction in incision length and, therefore, a less morbid operative technique.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

DeLaria GA , Hunter JA , Goldin MD , et al: Leg wound complications associated with coronary revascularization . J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 81:403-407, 1981.

Utley JR , Thomason ME , Wallace DJ , et al: Preoperative correlates of impaired wound healing after saphenous vein excision. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 98:147-149, 1989.

Schwartz ME , Harrington EB , Schanzer H. : Wound complications after in situ bypass. J Vasc Surg 7:802-807, 1988.

Wengrovitz M. , Atnip RG , Gifford RR , et al: Wound complications of autogenous subcutaneous infrainguinal arterial bypass surgery: Predisposing factors and management. J Vasc Surg 11:156-163, 1990.

Rosenthal D. , Herring MB , O'Donovan TG , et al: Endovascular infrainguinal in situ saphenous vein bypass: A multicenter preliminary report . J Vasc Surg 16:453-458, 1992.

Rosenthal D. , Dickson C. , Rodriquez FJ , et al: Infrainguinal endovascular in situ saphenous vein bypass: Ongoing results. J Vasc Surg 20:389-395, 1994.

Stierli P. , Aeberhard P. : Angioscopically-guided semi-closed technique for in situ bypass with a novel flushing valvulotome: Early results. J Vasc Surg 15:564-568, 1992.

Cikrit DF , Fiore NF , Dalsing MC , et al: A comparison of endovascular assisted and conventional in situ bypass grafts. Ann Vasc Surg 9:37-43, 1995.

Maini BS , Andrews L. , Salimi T. , et al: A modified, angioscopically assisted technique for in situ saphenous vein bypass: Impact on patency, complications, and length of stay. J Vasc Surg 17:1041-1049, 1993 .

10.

Dimitri WR , West E. , Williams BT : A quick and atraumatic method of autogenous vein harvesting using the subcutaneous extraluminal dissector. J Cardiovasc Surg 28:103-111, 1987.