Systematic review and meta-analysis of saphenous vein harvesting and grafting for lower extremity arterial bypass.

Abstract

In the present systematic review and meta-analysis, we compared the short- and long-term outcomes of different harvesting and grafting techniques in patients undergoing lower extremity arterial bypass. We searched multiple electronic databases (up to December 1, 2019) for comparative trials investigating different harvesting and bypass grafting techniques. We identified a total of 37 studies for our review. Skip incision harvesting showed a similar high primary patency rate (Peto odds ratio [OR], 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83-1.04; P = .20) with continuous incision harvesting and comparable low wound complication rates (relative risk, 1.55; 95% CI, 0.91-2.66; P = .11) with endoscopic harvesting. In situ bypass grafting a long-term patency similar to that of reversed grafting (Peto OR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.75-1.37; P = .93). However, for femoropopliteal bypass, the reversed bypass grafting group had significantly lower 2-year (Peto OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.52-0.78; P < .001) and 5-year (Peto OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.50-0.98; P = .04) failure rates compared with the in situ bypass grafting group. For infrapopliteal bypass, the in situ bypass grafting group had significantly lower 1-year (Peto OR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.04-2.28; P = .03), 2-year (Peto OR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.15-2.02; P = .003), and 3-year (Peto OR, 2.14; 95% CI, 1.13-4.05; P = .02) failure rates. Skip incision harvesting can be considered the first-line harvesting strategy. For patients undergoing femoropopliteal bypass, reversed bypass grafting seems to result in better long-term patency. In contrast, for those undergoing infrapopliteal bypass, in situ bypass grafting resulted in superior long-term patency.