İliofemoral ve femoropopliteal arterlerin tıkanıklığında endovasküler girişimler ile greft bypass cerrahisi tekniklerinin karşılaştırılması

Öz

Amaç: Periferik damar hastalığı önemli morbidite ve mortalite ile ilişkilidir. Bu çalışmada iliofemoral ve diz üstü femoropopliteal arter tıkanıklığında cerrahi baypas greftleme ile endovasküler stentleme arasında bir karşılaştırma yaparak her bir tedavi yönteminin avantaj ve dezavantajlarını ortaya çıkarmaya çalıştık. Gereç ve yöntem: Ocak 2015 ile Aralık 2020 arasında 60 hasta bu çalışmaya retrospektif olarak dahil edildi. Hastalar tedavi yöntemlerine göre iki gruba ayrıldı. Grup 1 33 hastadan oluşuyordu ve cerrahi baypas greftleme ile ameliyat edildi, grup 2 ise endovasküler girişim ile 27 hastadan oluşuyordu. Hastaların morbiditeleri, görüntüleme yöntemleri, tıkanıklığın lokalizasyonu, greft tipi ve endovasküler işlem, damar açıklığı, hastanede kalış süresi, kan transfüzyonu, revizyon ve komplikasyonlar değerlendirildi ve analiz edildi. Bulgular: Grup 1'de femoral arter tıkanıklığı (%72,7) çoğunluktayken, Grup 2'de iliak arter (%66,7) idi. Grup 1'de üç hasta, Grup 2'de balon uygulanan on dört hasta vardı. Vasküler açıklık açısından Grup 1'de 10 (%45,5) hastada greftler, Grup 2'de ise 12 (%54,5) hastada stent tıkandı. Grup 1'de on beş hastaya, Grup 2'de altı hastaya kan transfüzyonu yapıldı. Sonuç: Grup 1'de greft açıklık oranı daha yüksek, cerrahi tedavinin yeniden revaskülarizasyon oranı endovasküler tedaviye göre daha düşüktü. En yüksek greft açıklık oranı, safen venlerden sonra Dakron greftlerde görüldü. Grup 1 hastalara Grup 2 hastalarından daha fazla kan transfüzyonu yapıldı ve hastanede kalış süreleri uzatıldı.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Cerrahi bypass greftleme
• endovasküler stentleme
• arter tıkanıklığı
• vasküler açıklık

Proje Numarası

714483

Comparison of graft bypass surgery and endovascular interventional techniques in iliofemoral and above knee femoropopliteal arterial occlusion

Öz

Purpose: Peripheral vascular disease is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. In this study, we made a comparison between surgical bypass grafting and endovascular stenting in iliofemoral and above-knee femoropopliteal arterial occlusion to find out the advantages and disadvantages of each treatment method. Matarials and methods: This is a retrospective study, where 60 patients had undergone endovascular and surgical interventions due to the occlusion of the iliofemoral and above-knee femoropopliteal arteries between January 2015 and December 2020. Patients were divided into two groups according to their treatment method. Group 1 contained 33 patients and was operated on with surgical bypass grafting, while group 2 contained 27 with endovascular intervention. Patients’ morbidities, imaging methods, localization of occlusion, type of grafts and endovascular procedure, vascular patency, length of hospital stay, blood transfusion, revision, and complications were evaluated and analyzed. Results: The femoral artery occlusion (72.7%) was in the majority in Group 1, while the iliac artery (66.7%) was in Group 2. There were three patients in Group 1 and 14 patients in Group 2 who had balloon administration. Regarding vascular patency, the grafts were occluded in 10 (45.5%) patients in Group 1, while stents were occluded in 12 patients (54.5%) in Group 2. Blood transfusion was performed in fifteen patients in Group 2 and six patients in Group 2. Conclusion: The graft patency rate was higher in Group 1, and the re-revascularization rate of surgical treatment was lower than endovascular treatment. The highest graft patency rate was seen in the Dacron grafts then saphenous veins. Group 1 patients received more blood transfusions and extended hospital stayment periods than Group 2 patients.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Surgical bypass grafting
• endovascular stenting
• artery occlusion
• vascular patency

Destekleyen Kurum

PAÜ KALP VE DAMAR CERRAHİSİ

Proje Numarası

714483

Teşekkür

MOHAMMED ALŞALALDEH

Kaynakça

1. REFERNCES 1. Regensteiner JG, Hiatt WR, Coll JR, Criqui MH, Treat-Jacobson D, McDermott MM, et al. The impact of peripheral arterial disease on health-related quality of life in the Peripheral Arterial Disease Awareness, Risk, and Treatment: New Resources for Survival (PARTNERS) Program. Vasc Med. 2008, 13:15–24.
2. 2. Faggiotto A, Ross R. Studies of hypercholesterolemia in nonhuman primate: II. Fatty streak conversion to fibrous plaque. Aterosclerosis 4,1984: p 341.
3. 3. Boers GHJ, Smals AGH, Trijbels FJM, et al. Heterozygosity for homocystinuria in premature peripheral and cerebral occlusive arterial disease. N Eng J Med. 1985, 313,:p 709-15.
4. 4. Piepoli MJEHJ. Piepoli MF, Hoes AW, Agewall S, Albus C, Brotons C, Catapano AL, et al: 2016 European guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice. The Sixth Joint Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology and Other Societies on Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in Clinical Practice (constituted by representatives of 10 societies and by invited experts) developed with the special contribution of the European Association for Cardiovascular Prevention & Rehabilitation (EACPR). 2016,37:2315-81.
5. 5. Rooke T. W, Hirsch A. T, Misra S, Sidawy A. N, Beckman J. A, Ziv J. H, Nor-man R. H. et al. Lower Extremity, Renal, Mesenteric, and Abdominal Aortic. Circu-lation ACC/AHA 2005 Practice Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Peripheral Arterial Disease;2006, 113,:p 463-654.
6. 6. Aboyans V, Ricco J-B, Bartelink M-L, Björck M, Brodmann M, Cohner T, et al. 2017 ESC guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of peripheral arterial diseases, in collaboration with the European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS).; 2017, 75(11):1065-160.
7. 7. Chiu KW, Davies RS, Nightingale PG, Bradbury AW, Adam DJ.Review of direct anatomical open surgical management of atherosclerotic aorto-iliac occlusive disease. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg;2010, 39:460–471.
8. 8. Jongkind V, Akkersdijk GJ, Yeung KK, Wisselink WJJovs.A systematic review of endovascular treatment of extensive aortoiliac occlusive disease; 2010, 52(5):1376-83.

9. 9. Ebaugh JL, Gagnon D, Owens CD, Conte MS, Raffetto JDJTAjos. Comparison of costs of staged versus simultaneous lower extremity arterial hybrid procedures.2008, 196(5):634-40.
10. 10. Surowiec SM, Davies MG, Eberly SW, Rhodes JM, Illig KA, Shortell CK, et al. Percutaneous angioplasty and stenting of the superficial femoral artery; 2005, 41(2):269-78.
11. 11. Krankenberg H, Schlüter M, Steinkamp HJ, Bürgelin K, Scheinert D, Schulte K-L, et al.Nitinol Stent Implantation Versus Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty in Superficial Femoral Artery Lesions up to 10 cm in Length. 2007, 116(3):285-92.
12. 12. Malas MB, Enwerem N, Qazi U, Brown B, Schneider EB, Reifsnyder T, et al. Comparison of surgical bypass with angioplasty and stenting of superficial femoral artery disease. Journal of Vascular Surgery. 2014, 59(1):129-35.
13. 13. McQuade K, Gable D, Pearl G, Theune B, Black SJJovs.Four-year randomized prospective comparison of percutaneous ePTFE/nitinol self-expanding stent graft versus prosthetic femoral-popliteal bypass in the treatment of superficial femoral artery occlusive disease. 2010, 52(3):584-91. e7.
14. 14. Norgren LJJVS, S. Fowkes. FGR on behalf of the TASC II working group. 2007, 45(1):S5A-67A.
15. 15. Dearing DD, Patel KR, Compoginis JM, Kamel MA, Weaver FA, Katz SGJJovs. Primary stenting of the superficial femoral and popliteal artery. 2009, 50(3):542-7.
16. 16. Bradbury AW, Adam DJ, Bell J, Forbes JF, Fowkes FGR, Gillespie I, et al. Bypass versus Angioplasty in Severe Ischaemia of the Leg (BASIL) trial: An intention-to-treat analysis of amputation-free and overall survival in patients randomized to a bypass surgery-first or a balloon angioplasty-first revascularization strategy. Journal of Vascular Surgery. 2010, 51(5, Supplement):5S-17S.
17. 17. Karch LA, Mattos MA, Henretta JP, McLafferty RB, Ramsey DE, Hodgson KJJJovs. Clinical failure after percutaneous transluminal angioplasty of the superficial femoral and popliteal arteries. 2000, 31(5):880-8.
18. 18. Lo RC, Darling J, Bensley RP, Giles KA, Dahlberg SE, Hamdan AD, et al.Outcomes following infrapopliteal angioplasty for critical limb ischemia. Journal of Vascular Surgery. 2013, 57(6):1455-64
19. 19. Karch LA, Mattos MA, Henretta JP, McLafferty RB, Ramsey DE, Hodgson KJJJovs. Clinical failure after percutaneous transluminal angioplasty of the superficial femoral and popliteal arteries. 2000, 31(5):880-8.
20. 20. Değerlendirmesi, P. A. H. A. Infraninguinal periferik aterosklerotik arter hastalıklarında akım değerlendirmesinde anjiyografi ve renkli doppler ultrasonografinin karşılaştırılması. Turkish J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2004, 12, 259-261.
21. 21. Katsamouris AN, Giannoukas AD, Tsetis D, Kostas T, Petinarakis I, Gourtsoyiannis N.Can ultrasound replace arteriography in the management of chronic arterial occlusive disease of the lower limb? Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2001, 21:155-9.
22. 22. Catalano C, Fraioli F, Laghi A, Napoli A, Bezzi M, Pediconi F, Danti M, Nofroni I, Passariello R. Infrarenal aortic and lower-extremity arterial disease: diagnostic performance of multi-detector row CT angiography. Radiology. 2004, 231: 555- 63.
23. 23. Prokop M.Multislice CT angiography. Eur J Radiol. 2000, 36: 86-96.
24. 24. Scott EC, Biuckians A, Light RE, Scibelli CD, Milner TP, Meier III GH, et al. Subintimal angioplasty for the treatment of claudication and critical limb ischemia: 3-year results. 2007, 46(5):959-64.
25. 25. Johnson WC, Lee KKJJovs.A comparative evaluation of polytetrafluoroethylene, umbilical vein, and saphenous vein bypass grafts for femoral-popliteal above-knee revascularization: a prospective randomized Department of Veterans Affairs cooperative study. 2000, 32(2):268-77.