Open Surgical Secondary Interventions are More Durable than Endovascular Interventions for Lower Extremity Bypass Stenosis or Occlusion

Abstract

Objectives: Lower extremity bypasses often require secondary interventions to maintain patency. Our objectives were to characterize effectiveness of secondary interventions to maintain or restore bypass graft patency, and to compare outcomes of open and endovascular interventions. Methods: We reviewed patients who underwent lower extremity bypass at our institution from 2007 to 2010. We recorded the index bypass and subsequent ipsilateral interventions performed through 2018 or until loss of secondary patency. Patient, procedure, and anatomic data were collected. Endovascular intervention was compared with open/hybrid intervention. For outcome analysis, patency measures were defined relative to the time of the secondary intervention rather than the time of the index bypass. Results: 174 secondary interventions (56 open/hybrid, 118 endovascular; 42 for graft occlusion, and 132 for stenosis) treating 228 lesions in 97 bypasses were available for study. The index bypass was most commonly performed for tissue loss (71.1%), utilized a tibial artery target (57.7%), and used single-segment great saphenous vein (59.8%) rather than alternative vein (32.0%) or prosthetic (8.2%). A higher portion of open/hybrid interventions (51.8%) were done for graft occlusion than endovascular interventions (11.0%, P