CORONARY BYPASS SURGERY IN DIABETIC PATIENTS: THE PROBLEM OF LEG WOUND HEALING AND ENDOSCOPIC SAPHENOUS VEIN PREPARATION AS A SOLUTION

Öz

Objective: In this study, we aimed to compare the short-term wound healing results of the endoscopic vein preparation technique with the classical open vein preparation technique. Study design: Between January 2020 and January 2024, 628 patients undergone multiple coronary bypass surgery were included the study. Results: In this study 231 of whom underwent EVH and 399 of whom underwent OVH. In the EVH group M/F was 177/54, mean. Age was 61.06±10.2 years; range was 36-86 years, in OVH group M/F was 291/108, mean. age was: 62.4±9.57 years; range was 30 to 87 years. DM rate was higher and statistically significant in the EVH group (p=0,040) There was no difference between the two groups in terms of wound infection.(p=0,278) Non The rate of discharge with infection was 231/8 (3.5%) in the EVH group and 399/74 (18.5%) in the OVH group. (p<0,001). The rate of skin necrosis was 231/0(0%) in EVH and 399/49(12.3%) in OVH (p<0,001). Dehiscence rate was 231/4(1.7%) in EVH and 399/105(26.3%) in OVH (p<0,001). Revision frequency was 231/17(7.4%) in EVH and 399/103(25.8%) in OVH (p<0,001). Conclusion: We consider EVH is one of the best solutions for the problem of leg wound healing in diabetic patients. Keywords: Endoscopic vein removal, Coronary artery bypass graft surgery, classical Saphenous vein removal, leg wound infection, wound healing.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Endoscopic vein removal
• Coronary artery bypass graft surgery
• classical Saphenous vein removal
• leg wound infection
• wound healing.

DİYABETİK HASTALARDA KORONER BYPASS AMELİYATI: BACAK YARALARININ İYİLEŞMESİ SORUNU VE ÇÖZÜM OLARAK ENDOSKOPİK SAFEN VEN HAZIRLIĞI

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışmada, endoskopik damar hazırlama tekniğinin kısa dönem yara iyileşme sonuçlarının klasik açık damar hazırlama tekniği ile karşılaştırılması amaçlanmıştır. Çalışma tasarımı: Ocak 2020 ile Ocak 2024 tarihleri arasında, 628 hastaya çoklu koroner bypass cerrahisi uygulandı. Sonuçlar: Bu çalışmada 231 hastaya EVH ve 399 hastaya OVH uygulandı. EVH grubunda M/K 177/54, ortalama. Yaş 61.06±10.2 yıl; aralık 36-86 yıl, OVH grubunda M/F 291/108, ortalama. yaş: 62.4±9.57 yıl; aralık: 30-87 yıl. EVH grubunda DM oranı daha yüksekti ve istatistiksel olarak anlamlıydı (p=0.040). Yara enfeksiyonu açısından iki grup arasında fark yoktu.(p=0,278) Non Enfeksiyonla taburcu olma oranı EVH grubunda 231/8 (%3,5), OVH grubunda 399/74 (%18,5) idi. (p<0,001). Cilt nekrozu oranı EVH’de 231/0(0%) ve OVH’de 399/49(12.3%) idi (p<0,001). EVH’de açılma oranı 231/4(1.7%) ve açık cerrahide 399/105(26.3%) idi.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Endoskopik damar çıkarma
• Koroner arter bypass greft cerrahisi
• klasik Safen ven çıkarma
• bacak yarası enfeksiyonu
• yara iyileşmesi.

Kaynakça

1. Athanasiou, Thanos, Omer Aziz, Petros Skapinakis, Branco Perunovic, Jonathan Hart, Mary Claire Crossman, Vassilis Gorgoulis, Brian Glenville, and Roberto Casula. 2003. “Leg Wound Infection after Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: A Meta-Analysis Comparing Minimally Invasive versus Conventional Vein Harvesting.” The Annals of Thoracic Surgery 76(6): 2141–46. doi:10.1016/S0003-4975(03)01435-8.
2. Chou, Nai Kuan, Meng Lin Lee, and Shoei Shen Wang. 2009. “Endoscopic Vein Harvest in Elective Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting.” Journal of Zhejiang University: Science B 10(10): 748–52. doi:10.1631/jzus.B0940010.
3. Davis, Z., H. Kurt Jacobs, Mark Zhang, Celia Thomas, and Yolanda Castellanos. 1998. “Endoscopic Vein Harvest for Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: Technique and Outcomes.” Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery 116(2). doi:10.1016/S0022-5223(98)70121-7.
4. Krishnamoorthy, Bhuvaneswari, Joesph Zacharias, William R. Critchley, Melissa Rochon, Iryna Stalpinskaya, Azita Rajai, Rajamiyer V. Venkateswaran, Shahzad G. Raja, and Toufan Bahrami. 2021. “A Multicentre Review Comparing Long Term Outcomes of Endoscopic Vein Harvesting versus Open Vein Harvesting for Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery.” NIHR Open Research 1: 1–18. doi:10.3310/nihropenres.13215.1.
5. Kroeze, Vincent J., Ka Yan Lam, Albert H.M. van Straten, Saskia Houterman, and Mohamed A. Soliman-Hamad. 2019. “Benefits of Endoscopic Vein Harvesting in Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting.” In Annals of Thoracic Surgery, doi:10.1016/j.athoracsur.2019.04.065.
6. Liliav, Benjamin, Danny Yakoub, and Armen Kasabian. 2011. “Necrotizing Fasciitis Following Endoscopic Harvesting of the Greater Saphenous Vein for Coronary Artery Bypass Graft.” Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons 15(1): 90–95. doi:10.4293/108680811X13022985131453.
7. Lopes, Renato D, Gail E Hafley, Keith B Allen, T Bruce Ferguson, Eric D Peterson, Robert A Harrington, Rajendra H Mehta, et al. 2009. 361
8. Ouzounian, Maral, Ansar Hassan, Karen J. Buth, Celeste MacPherson, Idris M. Ali, Gregory M. Hirsch, and Imtiaz S. Ali. 2010. “Impact of Endoscopic Versus Open Saphenous Vein Harvest Techniques on Outcomes After Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting.” The Annals of Thoracic Surgery 89(2): 403–8. doi:10.1016/J.ATHORACSUR.2009.09.061.

9. Paletta, Christian E., David B. Huang, Andrew C. Fiore, Marc T. Swartz, Francisco L. Rilloraza, and Jan E. Gardner. 2000. “Major Leg Wound Complications after Saphenous Vein Harvest for Coronary Revascularization.” Annals of Thoracic Surgery 70(2): 492–97. doi:10.1016/S0003-4975(00)01414-4.
10. Raja, Shahzad G., Zulfiqar Haider, Mukhtar Ahmad, and Haider Zaman. 2004. “Saphenous Vein Grafts: To Use or Not to Use?” Heart, Lung and Circulation 13(2): 150–56. doi:10.1016/j.hlc.2004.03.013.
11. Sabiston, David C. 1963. “Direct Surgical Management of Congenital and Acquired Lesions of the Coronary Circulation.” Progress in Cardiovascular Diseases 6(3): 299–316. doi:10.1016/S0033-0620(63)80040-7.
12. Zenati, Marco A., Deepak L. Bhatt, Faisal G. Bakaeen, Eileen M. Stock, Kousick Biswas, J. Michael Gaziano, Rosemary F. Kelly, et al. 2019. “Randomized Trial of Endoscopic or Open Vein-Graft Harvesting for Coronary-Artery Bypass.” New England Journal of Medicine 380(2): 132–41. doi:10.1056/nejmoa1812390