The no-touch great saphenous vein harvesting technique for OPCABG: a single-center experience and short-term clinical outcomes
10.3760/cma.j.cn112434-20200723-00344
- VernacularTitle:No-touch技术获取大隐静脉应用于非体外循环冠状动脉旁路移植术单中心经验及近期效果评价
- Author:
Jizhong XUAN
1
;
Junjie SUN
;
Zhenwei GE
;
Junlong HU
;
Baocai WANG
;
Zhaoyun CHENG
Author Information
1. 河南省人民医院心脏中心 华中阜外医院 郑州大学华中阜外医院心脏外科 441464
- Keywords:
No-touch technique;
Great saphenous vein;
Coronary artery bypass grafting
- From:
Chinese Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
2021;37(8):472-476
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To study the safety and short-term clinical effect of no-touch technique for harvesting great saphenous vein in off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting(OPCABG).Methods:The clinical data of 117 patients in the single medical group who underwent OPCABG from December 2018 to April 2020 were analyzed retrospectively, including 55 patients in the no touch group (NTSV group) and 62 patients in the traditional open access group (traditional SV group). To evaluate the feasibility, safety and short-term clinical effect of using no-touch technique to harvest great saphenous vein for OPCABG. The no-touch technique was mainly based on the invention of Dr. Souza’s team in Sweden. For the treatment of isolated great saphenous veins, some improvements were made according to the clinical experience of the application of sequential bridging and radial artery in our center.Results:There were no significant differences between the two groups in hypertension, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, history of myocardial infarction, ventricular aneurysm formation, left ventricular systolic function reduction, history of cerebral infarction, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and other complications ( P>0.05). The NTSV group had higher male proportion (96.4% vs. 61.3%) and lower mean age (53.49 years old vs. 63.76 years old), and the difference were statistically significant ( P<0.01). The patients in the two groups successfully completed the operation without cardiopulmonary bypass, and the proximal anastomosis was the first. There were no statistical significances in the average number of bypass, time to acquire great saphenous vein, operation time, 24 h postoperative thoracic drainage, blood bank transfusion, secondary thoracotomy and hemostasis, perioperative myocardial infarction, hospital death, ICU stay time, postoperative hospital stay time, and poor healing of lower limb incision of the two groups. One year after the operation, 36 patients were followed up, including 15 patients in NTSV group, and 21 patients in traditional SV group. There was no recurrence of angina pectoris, no out of hospital death and other major adverse cardiovascular events. Among them, 26 patients completed CTA reexamination of coronary artery, including 12 patients in NTSV group and 14 patients in traditional SV group, the patency rate of vein bridge was 96.4% vs. 87.2%. There was no reduction of left ventricular ejection fraction and no revascularization. Conclusion:The method of using no-touch technique to harvest great saphenous vein is safe and feasible. It does not increase the operation time and the incidence of poor healing of lower limb incision. The short-term effect of applying no-touch technique for harvesting great saphenous vein to OPCABG is better than the traditional open way.
