Comparison of venous and HePTFE tibial and peroneal bypasses in critical limb ischemia patients unsuitable for endovascular revascularization
Uhl et al. 20151
Department of Vascular Surgery, Krankenhaus Barmherzige Brüder, Regensburg, Germany
Primary patency of GORE® PROPATEN® Vascular Graft
Patient characteristics*
Characteristic | N | % |
---|---|---|
Rutherford classification | ||
4 | 23 | 26% |
5 | 66 | 74% |
6 | 7 | 8% |
CLI | 89 | 100% |
Hypertension | 80 | 90% |
Diabetes | 41 | 46% |
Renal insufficiency | 41 | 46% |
Prior operation | 43 | 48% |
Distal anastomotic vessel | ||
TP trunk | 4 | 5% |
Anterior tibial | 52 | 67% |
Posterior tibial | 12 | 15% |
Peroneal artery | 10 | 13% |
Study details
- Retrospective, non-randomized, single-center analysis of prospectively collected data
- GORE® PROAPTEN® Vascular Graft was utilized in patients lacking an adequate autologous vein (diameter less than 3 mm or more than two vein segments required to achieve needed length)
- 30-day mortality and major amputation rates were both 7%
- Survival rates at one year and three years were 77% and 47%, respectively
The results of our study show that autologous vein grafts are still first choice for tibial and peroneal bypasses in patients with critical limb ischemia. If no adequate vein is available, heparin-bonded expanded polytetrafluoroethylene bypasses are an acceptable alternative to an otherwise impending major amputation. – C. Uhl
1. Uhl C, Hock C, Betz T, Greindl M, Töpel I, Steinbauer M. Comparison of venous and HePTFE tibial and peroneal bypasses in critical limb ischemia patients unsuitable for endovascular revascularization. Vascular 2015;23(6):607-613.