[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 54.161.155.6. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Article
April 1988

Comparative Evaluation of Prosthetic, Reversed, and In Situ Vein Bypass Grafts in Distal Popliteal and Tibial-Peroneal RevascularizationVeterans Administration Cooperative Study Group 141

Arch Surg. 1988;123(4):434-438. doi:10.1001/archsurg.1988.01400280040008
Abstract

• In 1983, the Veterans Administration initiated a cooperative study in 18 medical centers to perform a prospective comparative evaluation of vascular grafts. Five hundred ninety-six patients have had femoropopliteal below-knee or femorotibial-peroneal (polytetrafluoroethylene, umbilical vein, in situ, or reversed saphenous vein) bypasses. Patency evaluation at two years revealed that for femoropopliteal below-knee reconstruction, the vein patency (76%) was better than prosthetic patency (64%). For femorotibial-peroneal reconstructions, the two-year patency for vein bypasses (73%) was significantly better than for prosthetic bypass grafts (30%). In general, the site of the distal anastomosis did not affect vein patency, but, with prosthetic bypasses, patency at two years progressively decreased with a more distal anastomosis. In situ and reversed saphenous vein bypasses had similar two-year patency for both femoropopliteal below-knee and femorotibial reconstructions.

(Arch Surg 1988;123:434-438)

×