[Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]
Article
June 1986

Results of Arterial Reconstruction of the Foot

Author Affiliations

From the Departments of Surgery, University of Illinois School of Medicine, Chicago (Drs Pasch, Dillon, Douglas, Schuler, and Flanigan), and the University of Health Sciences, The Chicago Medical School, North Chicago (Drs Buchbinder and Rollins).

Arch Surg. 1986;121(6):673-677. doi:10.1001/archsurg.1986.01400060067009
Abstract

• Sixty-five patients with critical ischemia required bypass to foot vessels. These procedures were performed by five different techniques: (1) femoral-foot bypass with in situ saphenous vein; (2) femoral-foot bypass with reversed autogenous saphenous vein; (3) femoral-foot bypass with polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE); (4) popliteal-foot bypass with reversed autogenous saphenous vein; and (5) popliteal-foot bypass with PTFE. The two-year patency rate of femoral-foot bypass with in situ vein (96%) was significantly higher than femoral-foot bypass with reversed vein (42%), while both procedures demonstrated significantly higher patency than femoral-foot bypass with PTFE (0%). Popliteal-foot bypass with reversed vein (92%) was superior to both popliteal-foot bypass with PTFE (27%) and femoral-foot bypass with PTFE (0%). Femoral-foot bypass with in situ vein and popliteal-foot bypass with reversed vein have appreciably increased vein utilization, graft patency, and limb salvage.

(Arch Surg 1986;121:673-677)

×