Journal of Clinical Medicine (May 2023)

Long-Term Outcome of Bypass Surgery versus Endovascular Revascularization in Long Femoropopliteal Lesions

  • Michaela Kluckner,
  • Leonhard Gruber,
  • David Wippel,
  • Daniela Lobenwein,
  • Werner Westreicher,
  • Manuela Pilz,
  • Florian K. Enzmann

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12103507
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 12, no. 10
p. 3507

Abstract

Read online

Long-term follow-up data comparing surgical and endovascular revascularization of femoropopliteal lesions is rarely reported. This study presents 4-year results of revascularization for long femoropopliteal lesions (Trans-Atlantic Inter-Society Consensus Types C and D) with vein bypass (VBP), polytetrafluorethylene bypass (PTFE), and endovascular intervention with a nitinol stent (NS). Data from a randomized-controlled trial on VBP and NS was compared with a retrospective patient cohort using PTFE with the same inclusion and exclusion criteria. Primary, primary assisted, and secondary patency, as well as changes in Rutherford categories and limb salvage rates, are reported. Between 2016 and 2020, 332 femoropopliteal lesions underwent revascularization. The lesion lengths and basic patient characteristics were similar between the groups. 49% of the patients presented with chronic limb threatening ischemia at the time of revascularization. During the four-year follow-up, primary patency was comparable for all three groups. Primary assisted and secondary patency were significantly higher after VBP, while PTFE and NS had similar results. Clinical improvement was also significantly superior after VBP. After four years of follow-up, patency rates as well as the clinical outcome clearly favor VBP. If no vein is available, NS is as effective as PTFE bypass with regard to patency and clinical outcome.

Keywords