-
Comparative Study
Long-term outcomes after autogenous versus synthetic lower extremity bypass in patients on hemodialysis.
- Isibor Arhuidese, Caitlin W Hicks, Satinderjit Locham, Tammam Obeid, Besma Nejim, and Mahmoud B Malas.
- Division of Vascular Surgery, Johns Hopkins Medical Institution, Baltimore, MD; Division of Vascular Surgery, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL.
- Surgery. 2017 Nov 1; 162 (5): 1071-1079.
BackgroundHemodialysis dependence confers unique physiologic conditions. Prior reports of outcomes after infrainguinal open bypass operations in patients on hemodialysis have been based on relatively small sample institutional series. In this study, we evaluate long-term outcomes after open bypass operations in a large contemporary population-based cohort of hemodialysis patients. We studied all hemodialysis patients who underwent infrainguinal open operation using autogenous versus prosthetic conduits in the United States Renal Data System between January 2007 and December 2011.MethodsUnivariate methods (χ2, analysis of variance) were used to compare the characteristics of the patient and type of bypass. Kaplan-Meier, univariate and multivariate logistic, and Cox regression analyses were used to evaluate 30-day postoperative outcomes as well as patency, limb salvage, and mortality in the long term.ResultsThere were 9,739 (autogenous: 59%, prosthetic: 49%) infrainguinal open bypass operations performed in this cohort. Of these, 4,717 (48%) were femoral-popliteal, 3,321 (34%) were femoral-tibial, and 1,701 (18%) were popliteal-tibial bypasses. Bypass operations were performed most commonly for critical limb ischemia (72%). Primary patency was 18% for both types of conduits at 5 years (P = .16). Comparing autogenous versus prosthetic conduits, primary-assisted patency was 23% vs 20% at 5 years (P = .98), while secondary patency was 30% for both conduits at 5 years (P = .05). Limb salvage was 35% vs 41% at 5 years (P < .001). Multivariable analyses demonstrated greater patency (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 1.16; 95% confidence interval, 1.05-1.28; P = .003) and limb salvage (aHR: 1.12; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.24; P = .03) for autogenous compared to prosthetic bypasses. The advantage conferred by autogenous conduits was most clinically relevant for femoral-tibial (aHR: 1.34; 95% confidence interval, 1.17-1.55; P < .001) and popliteal-tibial (aHR: 1.55; 95% confidence interval, 1.09-2.21; P = .014) configurations.ConclusionThis large study evaluated the long-term outcomes of open bypass operations in patients on hemodialysis. The data confirm the long-term benefits of autogenous conduits compared with prosthetic conduits in this high-risk population of patients, especially for the treatment of distal lesions. Individual patient life expectancy, availability of adequate autogenous conduit options, indication for operation, level of disease, as well as potential need for future options for additional access for dialysis should be taken into consideration when deciding to construct an open bypass in a hemodialysis patient.Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.