Prosthetic Conduit Use Does Not Adversely Impact Outcomes after Open Repair of Popliteal Artery Aneurysms.

BACKGROUND: Single segment, greater saphenous vein (GSV) conduit is considered the optimal bypass conduit among patients undergoing bypass surgery for peripheral artery disease (PAD). While this data has been extrapolated to patients undergoing bypass for popliteal artery aneurysms (PAAs), the pathophysiology of PAA is inherently different when compared to PAD, and the impact of conduit type on long-term outcomes after open repair of PAA remains unclear. METHODS: A multicenter database of five regional hospitals was retrospectively reviewed for all patients with PAA undergoing open surgical repair. Data were collected on demographic information, operative details, medications, and postoperative outcomes. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to compare freedom from major adverse limb events (MALE) following GSV versus prosthetic bypass. Cox proportional hazards model was used to identify patient-level characteristics associated with MALE, which was defined as major ipsilateral limb amputation or reintervention for graft patency. RESULTS: From 1999 to 2020, a total of 101 patients with PAA underwent open exclusion and bypass surgery. Median follow-up period was 4.2 years (interquartile range, 1.3-7.4 years), and complete data were available for 99 (98.0%) patients. The majority of patients were male (99.0%) and Caucasian (93.9%). Only 11.1% of procedures were emergent, with the remainder (88.9%) being elective. All patients underwent medial exposure with a below-knee popliteal bypass target (100%). Bypass conduits included GSV (69.7%), prosthetic conduit (28.3%), and 2 (2.0%) alternative conduits (one spliced arm vein, one cryopreserved vein). Patients undergoing prosthetic bypass were older (72 vs. 66 years, P = 0.001) and had similar rates of medical comorbidities. Compared with the GSV group, patients with prosthetic conduits were more frequently placed on postoperative anticoagulation (60.7% vs. 23.2%, P < 0.001). Conduit type did not impact postoperative complication rates (P = NS each). MALE rates were low overall (19.2% at 2 years), and similar when stratified by conduit type (log rank P = 0.47). On multivariable analysis, emergent bypass was associated with MALE (hazard ratio [HR] 5.73, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.07-15.85, P < 0.001). Prosthetic conduit usage (HR 1.00, 95% CI, 0.40-2.51, P = 0.99) and postoperative anticoagulation (HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.42-2.50, P = 0.97) were not associated with MALE. CONCLUSIONS: Open repair of PAA is associated with excellent long-term outcomes. Prosthetic bypass is a comparable alternative to autogenous conduit for below-knee popliteal bypass targets, and lack of suitable GSV should not prohibit open surgical repair when indicated.

Duke Scholars

Author Kevin William Southerland Surgery, Vascular and Endovascular Surgery

Author Zachary F Williams Surgery, Vascular and Endovascular Surgery

Author Young Kim Surgery, Vascular and Endovascular Surgery

Author Chandler Alexander Long Surgery, Vascular and Endovascular Surgery