Original articleAdult cardiacImpact of Endoscopic Versus Open Saphenous Vein Harvest Techniques on Outcomes After Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting
Section snippets
Study Sample
All patients who underwent first-time isolated CABG or combined valve/CABG with the use of a saphenous vein graft at the Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre in Halifax, Nova Scotia, between June 1, 1998, and May 31, 2007, were identified through the Maritime Heart Center Cardiac Surgery Registry (MHCCSR). Patients with previous CABG surgery were excluded, as were cases in which both EVH and OVH techniques were used for vein harvesting. Approval from the Institutional Research Ethics Board
Results
A total of 5,825 patients formed the final study population. Of these, 2,004 (34.4%) underwent CABG or combined valve/CABG with EVH. The mean age of patients in this study was 66.4 ± 10.3 years, and 25.7% were female. A subgroup of 4,365 cases was available for linkage with administrative data and midterm analysis. Median follow-up time for patients discharged from hospital alive was 2.6 years (interquartile range, 1.0 to 4.6), and a total of 12,960 person-years of follow-up was available for
Comment
This is a large observational study examining midterm clinical outcomes of patients undergoing CABG or combined valve/CABG surgery with open or endoscopically harvested saphenous vein. We found no negative association between EVH and short-term and midterm adverse outcomes. Consistent with previous reports, EVH was associated with a reduced incidence of leg wound infections. It was also associated with a reduced rate of readmission to hospital for unstable angina.
Minimally invasive endoscopic
References (26)
- et al.
Leg wound infection after coronary artery bypass grafting: a meta-analysis comparing minimally invasive versus conventional vein harvesting
Ann Thorac Surg
(2003) - et al.
Endoscopic versus open saphenous vein harvest: a comparison of postoperative wound complications
Ann Thorac Surg
(2002) - et al.
Endoscopic vein harvest: advantages and limitations
Ann Thorac Surg
(2004) - et al.
A prospective randomized trial of endoscopic versus conventional harvesting of the saphenous vein in coronary artery bypass surgery
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg
(2002) - et al.
Prospective analysis of endoscopic vein harvesting
Am J Surg
(2001) - et al.
A randomized trial of endoscopic versus open saphenous vein harvest in coronary bypass surgery
Ann Thorac Surg
(1999) - et al.
Randomized trial of endoscopic versus open vein harvest for coronary artery bypass grafting: six-month patency rates
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg
(2005) - et al.
Endoscopic and traditional saphenous vein harvest: a histologic comparison
Ann Thorac Surg
(2000) - et al.
Coronary artery bypass graft failure after on-pump and off-pump coronary artery bypass: findings from PREVENT IV
Ann Thorac Surg
(2008) - et al.
Saphenous vein conduits harvested by endoscopic technique exhibit structural and functional damage
Ann Thorac Surg
(2009)
Is minimally invasive harvesting of the great saphenous vein for coronary artery bypass surgery a cost-effective technique?
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg
Does minimally invasive vein harvesting technique affect the quality of the conduit for coronary revascularization?
Ann Thorac Surg
Immunocytochemical study on endothelial integrity of saphenous vein grafts harvested by minimally invasive surgery with the use of vascular mayo stripersA randomized controlled trial
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg
Cited by (77)
Uniportal Endoscopic Vein Harvest Using the Three-Step Haemostatic Technique—A Modified Approach
2022, Heart Lung and CirculationMid-term and long-term outcomes of endoscopic versus open vein harvesting for coronary artery bypass: A systematic review and meta-analysis
2019, International Journal of SurgeryCitation Excerpt :The incidence of leg-wound complications was significantly lower in EVH group than that in the OVH group (0.75% versus 2.92%; OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.12–0.30; P < 0.001) (Table 2 and Supplemental Fig. 2). The rate of MACE was illustrated in thirteen studies [6,8,9,22,23,25,27–29,33,35,37,40], however, significant differences were absent between EVH and OVH (IRR 1.01, 95% CI 0.54–1.90; P = 0.98) (Fig. 3). Results for the comparison of graft patency are shown in Fig. 4.
Benefits of Endoscopic Vein Harvesting in Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting
2019, Annals of Thoracic SurgeryCommentary on: Endoscopic vein harvesting for coronary artery bypass grafting in the UK: what we believe and what we do. A Commentary on the article “Use of endoscopic vein harvesting (EVH) during coronary artery bypass grafting in United Kingdom: The EVH survey”, Int J Surg 2019;69:146-151
2019, International Journal of SurgeryUse of endoscopic vein harvesting (EVH) during coronary artery bypass grafting in United Kingdom: The EVH survey
2019, International Journal of SurgerySaphenous vein composite graft based on the left internal thoracic artery: A vein by any other name!
2018, Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery