Comparison of Femoropopliteal Bypass and Superficial Femoral ArteryStenting for Treating Femoral Artery Occlusive Disease.
- Author:
Gun LEE
1
;
Chang Young LIM
;
Man Deuk KIM
;
Hyeon Jae LEE
Author Information
1. Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Bundang CHA General Hospital, College of Medicine, Pochon CHA University, Korea. gunlee@cvnet.co.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Peripheral vascular disease;
Atherosclerosis;
Stents;
Bypass surgery
- MeSH:
Alloys;
Atherosclerosis;
Femoral Artery;
Gangrene;
Humans;
Hypertension;
Male;
Peripheral Vascular Diseases;
Skin Ulcer;
Smoke;
Smoking;
Stents;
Transplants
- From:The Korean Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
2009;42(1):53-58
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND: The goal of this study was to compare the patency and complications of femoropopliteal bypass with superficial femoral artery stenting for patients with atherosclerotic superficial femoral artery occlusive disease. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Between July 2005 and July 2008, we reviewed 29 femoropopliteal bypass procedures (24 patients) with prosthetic grafts (the bypass group) and 19 superficial femoral artery stentings (15 patients) with nitinol stent (the stent group). There were 35 male patients (89.7%) and the mean age of the patients was 69.2 years (range: 48~84). The number of patients who had DM, hypertension and a smoking history was 25 patients (64.1%), 17 patients (43.6%) and 30 patients (76.9%), respectively. 23 (59.0%) patients had skin ulceration or tissue gangrene at admission. RESULT: There were 27 cases (93.0%) of TASC C&D lesion in the bypass group and 16 cases (84.2%) of TASC A&B lesion in the stent group. There were significant differences for the indications for a procedure between the two groups (p<0.01). The primary patency rates at 6 months, 12 months and 24 months were 91.9%, 79.7% and 79.7% for the bypass group and 93.3%, 86.2% and 86.2% for the stent group, respectively. There were no statistical difference between the two groups (p=0.48). CONCLUSION: There were no significant differences in the outcome between two groups. TASC C&D lesion and failed intervention therapy should be treated with femoropopliteal bypass surgery, and TASC A&B lesion and the high-risk patients should be treated with femoral artery stent insertion.
