Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Gefässchirurgie 2/2016

Open Access 01.08.2016 | Leitthema

Operative technique and morbidity of superficial femoral vein harvest

verfasst von: PD Dr. A. Neufang, S. Savvidis

Erschienen in: Gefässchirurgie | Sonderheft 2/2016

Abstract

Background

The use of autologous superficial femoral veins (SFV) as an arterial or venous substitute represents a valuable technique in modern vascular surgery with versatile indications. The SFV autografts exhibit excellent control of infection and durable long-term results in terms of graft patency in prosthetic or arterial infections. In cases of elective use of the SFV, duplex ultrasound evaluation of the deep leg vein system should be implemented to confirm the patency of the profunda femoris vein.

Material and methods

The SFV can be harvested distal to the adductor hiatus with a proximal portion of the popliteal vein but should not exceed the level of the knee joint. Formation of a stump of the proximal SFV must be avoided. Simultaneous harvesting of the ipsilateral greater saphenous vein should be avoided to reduce the risk of significant chronic edema.

Results

Early postoperative swelling of the donor leg can be expected but resolves spontaneously in most cases. Chronic mild edema of the leg with a possible indication for compression therapy may occur in up to 20 % of cases but severe complications are very rare if the anatomical borders for vein harvesting are respected. Temporary therapeutic anticoagulation after vein harvest is subject to individual decision making.

Conclusion

Duplex ultrasound is a reliable tool to assess the residual deep and superficial venous system in the long term. Excellent graft function and the tolerable adverse effects of vein harvest on the donor leg justify the use of the SFV in arterial and venous vascular surgery if indicated.

Introduction

It is thanks to Martin Schulman that the significance of deep leg veins, the superficial femoral vein (SFV), as an autologous vascular graft in arterial and venous vascular surgery was recognized and that it is finding increasingly broader applications. He used the SFV as an autologous graft in peripheral bypass surgery for the first time in 1974 and reported comparable results using the SFV and the great saphenous vein (GSV) as femoropopliteal bypass material in 1987 [13]. Although the results of surgery performed largely for critical ischemia due to artherosclerotic occlusion of the femoropopliteal axis were good with secondary patency of up to 83 % at 4 years, Schulman was subjected to massive criticism due to the significantly more invasive SFV harvesting technique compared with conventional GSV harvesting. Severe complications due to restricted venous outflow following SFV harvest were feared and the method was criticized for its experimental nature [4]; however, Schulman et al. reported early on only slightly increased leg edema following SFV harvesting compared with GSV dissection and harvesting [1]. Schanzer et al. confirmed this finding as early as 1991 in another investigation, which also found only mild calf enlargement in the affected leg following SFV harvest and supported the role of the SFV as a replacement material for large veins or as an arterial graft [5]. Due in particular to the efforts of Clagett et al. in the USA and Nevelsteen et al. in Europe, the use of the SFV quickly met with acceptance and widespread application as a technique for autologous vascular reconstruction in septic vascular surgery for graft infection in the aortoiliac region or in the case of primary arterial infection [6, 7].

Indications for use of the superficial femoral vein

The SFV is now well established as an autologous graft in reconstructive arterial and venous vascular surgery. Histomorphological investigations have shown that the collagen and elastin composition of the vein wall and its associated compliance is comparatively similar to that of an autologous artery, thereby also explaining the low tendency toward marked myointimal hyperplasia [8]. In addition to the excellent data on fully autologous reconstruction in septic vascular surgery involving the repair of infected conventional vascular grafts or mycotic aneurysms [6, 7, 916], results on the successful use of this approach in infected stents or stent grafts are also available [1719]. This also applies to the thoracic or thoracoabdominal aorta in individual cases [20, 21]; however, the SFV has also proved its worth as a permanent conduit for other indications. In the case of failed conventional or endovascular repair it can be effectively deployed in aortoiliac reconstruction due to arterial occlusive disease in the pelvic region [22, 23]. It can be successfully used as peripheral bypass material [13, 2427] as well as in the reconstruction of arterial and venous visceral [28, 29] and supra-aortic arterial vessels [30, 31]. There are indications for its use in the reconstruction of large veins [32], such as the superior [3338] and inferior [3941] vena cava, as well as in cancer surgery [42, 43]. A great deal of experience has already been gained with the SFV in the creation of arteriovenous fistulas for hemodialysis access [4446] (see Table 1 for a summary of possible indications and representative results).
Table 1
Indications for use of the superficial femoral vein
Indication
Author
Year
Localization
Number of procedures
Patency/particular features
Graft infection/arterial infection in abdominal aortic and iliac vessels
Clagett et al. [6]
1993
Aortoiliac
20
100 %
Nevelsteen et al.[16]
1995
Aortoiliac
15
13/15 (all survivors)
Clagett et al. [10]
1997
Aortoiliofemoral
41
100 % 5 years secondary
Franke and Voit[14]
1997
Aortoiliac
7
100 %
Daenens et al. [11]
2003
Aortoiliac
49
91 % 5 years primary
Ehsan and Gibbons [13]
2009
Aortoiliac
46
91 % 5 years secondary
Ali et al. [9]
2009
Aortoiliac
187
91 % 6 years secondary
Dorweiler et al. [12]
2014
Aortoiliac
86
97 % 5 years secondary iliac
Heinola et al. [15]
2015
Aortoiliofemoral
55
80 % Intervention-free 6 years
EVAR stent graft infection
Fatima et al. [18]
2013
Aortoiliac
2
Davila et al. [17]
2015
Aortoiliac
4
Iliac stent infection
Sternbergh and Money [19]
2005
Common iliac artery
Case report
5 year patency and survival
Thoracic and thoracoabdominal aorta
Tambyraja et al. [21]
2003
Thoracoabdominal aortic patch graft infection
Case report
Survival and resolution
Okamoto et al. [20]
2012
Descending aorta graft infection
Case report
Survival and resolution
Aortoiliac occlusive diseasea
D’Addio et al. [22]
2005
Crossover bypass
54
90 % 5 years secondary
Premature atherosclerosis
Jackson et al. [23]
2004
Aortofemoral bypass
31
100 % 5 years
Peripheral bypass material
Schulman et al. [1]
1987
Femoropopliteal bypass
76
83 % 5 years secondary
Sladen et al. [26]
1994
Infrainguinal bypass
25
80 % 2 years secondary
Wozniak et al. [27]
1998
Infrainguinal bypass
32 (PTFE composite)
56 % 4 years secondary
Gibbons et al. [24]
2003
Infrainguinal bypass
12
76 % 4 years secondary
Kaczynski and Gibbons [25]
2011
Infrainguinal bypass
20
78 % 12 months
Visceral arterial vessel reconstruction
Modrall et al. [28]
2003
Visceral artery bypass/replacement
20
100 % 2 years
Supra-aortic arteries
Modrall et al. [30]
2002
Supra-aortic bypass (subclavian artery, carotid artery, axillary artery)
18
100 % 4 years assisted
Schindler et al. [31]
2002
Subclavian artery replacement for mycotic aneurysm
Case report
Vein rupture in persistent infection!
Large vein replacement
Hagino et al. [32]
1997
Vena cava and peripheral veins
7
100 % 2 years
Kanno et al. [36]
Gladstone et al. Klima et al. [38]
Erbella et al. [33]
Eshtaya et al. [34]
Kennedy and Palit [37]
1981
1985
1994
[35] 2006
2008
2010
Superior vena cava
Case report or series
Schwartz et al. [41]
Bower et al. [39]
DuBay et al. [40]
1991
2000
2009
Inferior vena cava
Case report or series
Injury to the superior mesenteric vein
Tulip et al. [29]
2012
Superior mesenteric vein replacement
Case report
1 year
Cancer surgery
White et al. [43]
2005
Iliac vein sarcoma
Case report
Lee et al. [42]
2010
Portal vein system
15
Arteriovenous fistula
Gradman et al. [46]
2001
AV shunt
25
86 % 12 months secondary
Gilbert and Gibbs [45]
2011
AV loop
16
90 % 12 months secondary
Bourquelot et al. [44]
2012
Dialysis shunt
70
56 % 9 years
AV arteriovenous, EVAR endovascular aortic repair, PTFE polytetrafluoroethylene afemorofemoral bypasses were placed for aortoiliac disease

Anatomy of the deep venous system

The deep venous system of the leg is made up of the structurally double lower leg veins, the popliteal vein, the SFV, the deep femoral vein and the common femoral vein. The veins of the calf, the so called tibial and peroneal veins are doubled and form after their union the popliteal vein in the upper calf. The popliteal vein follows a spiral-shaped course around the popliteal artery and lies in the proximal popliteal fossa dorsolateral to the artery. Once it has passed through the adductor hiatus, the popliteal vein proximally becomes the SFV, which lies posterolateral to the accompanying artery in the adductor canal, along the course of which it receives numerous tributaries. The vein itself is crossed by arterial tributaries of the accompanying superficial femoral artery, which, in the case of existing femoral peripheral arterial disease (PAD) particularly in the distal portion, can represent important collaterals. The SFV and the deep femoral vein join to form the common femoral vein 4–12 cm below the inguinal ligament. The deep femoral vein lies anterior to the deep femoral artery. Worthy of note is the lateral femoral circumflex vein, an important branch of the deep femoral vein extending laterally, which is susceptible to injury during dissection in this region [47].

Preliminary diagnostic work-up in planned superficial femoral vein harvest

The decision to use the SFV for arterial or venous reconstruction may be taken either in the acute setting during surgery or earlier on at the preliminary stage of planning elective surgery. The status of venous collateral circulation of the popliteal vein via the deep femoral vein in a central direction, which will be needed in the future, is the key to the planned harvest of the SFV. The requisite central venous outflow in the common femoral vein is only guaranteed long-term if the deep femoral vein is intact. This phenomenon is already known from venous pathology of the thigh as axial transformation, although the author of that particular study [48] described this structural variation in relation to postthrombotic disease or obliteration of the SFV. Raju et al. described the deep femoral vein as the dominant or only venous outflow vessel in the diseased leg in up to 45 % of extremities with venous stasis. The deep femoral vein is also able to accommodate increased circulation due to a corresponding increase in caliber [48].
Information on the extent of possible previous arterial surgery in the groin and on the affected leg is crucial in cases where use of the SFV is planned. It is essential to establish, possibly from old surgical reports, whether the deep femoral vein has been affected by previous dissection of the deep femoral artery or profundaplasty or possibly dissected in a targeted manner in the course of artery exposure. Where this is the case, harvesting from a leg that has undergone surgery of this kind is naturally prohibited. Previous harvest of the GSV, on the other hand, does not represent a contraindication, assuming future outflow is guaranteed by the deep femoral vein [49].
Schulman et al. performed SFV harvesting only after prior phlebography of the deep venous system and upon confirmation of an intact deep femoral vein [2, 3]. This approach, however, has largely disappeared from the clinical routine and is no longer a routine diagnostic measure due to the broad availability of duplex ultrasound. With the exception of emergency situations, preoperative evaluation of the superficial and deep venous system should always be performed using duplex ultrasound. In the case of a spontaneous, intraoperative decision to use the SFV without preoperative duplex examination, the venous confluence between the SFV and the deep femoral vein in the proximal thigh should be surgically explored for integrity of the profunda femoris vein in a first step and only after this should further dissection of the SFV take place. If postthrombotic changes to the SFV are found the vein should not be used [47]. Duplication of the deep venous system in the thigh is known to be present in up to 25 % of individuals and can be easily identified using duplex sonography [50]; however, even a duplicated vein can be used as a graft, assuming it has the appropriate caliber (Fig. 1a,b). One usually sees a venous caliber of 5–9 mm on duplex sonography. If the use of the vein from both legs is anticipated in the context of extensive revision of an infected central aortic graft or an aortobifemoral graft bypass, preoperative evaluation of both legs for possible vein harvesting is essential. In such cases, this also applies to the status of the previously operated femoral artery. Duplex sonography is well-suited to confirming the patency of the profunda femoris vein (Fig. 1c), thereby simplifying planning in the case of extremities that, in some cases, have undergone multiple previous surgeries.

Procedure for the dissection and harvest of superficial femoral veins

In principle, the possible use of the SFV in elective or emergency vascular surgical interventions should already be considered when positioning and draping the patient. The same also applies in elective cancer surgery where potential vascular involvement is anticipated and possible SFV harvesting has been included in the surgical concept following preoperative, interdisciplinary consultation. Both legs, including the groin region, should always be completely disinfected and draped. In the case of aortoiliac graft infection, draping should also take the creation of a cross-over bypass as a possible variant into consideration and leave the suprapubic region visibly exposed with a view to bypass routing. As in bypass surgery, it is advisable to place a cylindrical cushion under the knee, thereby facilitating dissection in the proximal popliteal fossa. With the leg slightly externally rotated and the knee flexed, a longitudinal incision is made in the thigh from a proximal direction along the ventral course of the sartorius muscle, possibly extending to the level of the knee where necessary (Fig. 2a). A long segment of the adductor canal is opened in front of the muscle and the SFV is exposed in a proximal and distal direction while preserving the small branches that perfuse the muscle with blood (Fig. 2b). The superficial femoral artery is also preserved or, in the case of pre-existing occlusion, meticulous attention is paid to the preservation of distal collaterals to the popliteal artery. The unnecessary sacrifice of collaterals of this kind can, in the worst case, cause severe ischemia in the affected leg.
The required length of the SFV is then completely harvested from its bed in a step by step approach. Early ligation of the vein is not beneficial; however, it is essential that blood flow in the vein is maintained throughout the entire dissection phase in order to avoid stagnation thrombosis in the SFV. It is sometimes necessary to carefully dissect around accompanying arterial structures without compromising these. As part of this process, the venous side branches are ligated as far as possible peripherally using (double) clips and, in the case of planned implantation in an infected site, the central stump of the venous branch is oversewn to the SFV with non-absorbable sutures (5.0 or 6.0 polypropylene) using a transfixion ligature. If implantation is performed in an uncontaminated area, (possibly double) conventional ligation using a non-absorbable suture (e. g. 4.0 Mersilene) can be carried out; however, a number of experienced authors have pointed out the risk of postoperative bleeding due to loosening of the ligature [51].
Centrally, the junction of the deep femoral vein and the common femoral vein is visualized by exposing the venous confluence in such a way that it can be clamped tangentially and the SFV can be excised over the clamp using a scalpel or scissors. The excision margin is then sutured with a continuous polypropylene suture over the horizontal clamp in such a way that a harmonious junction between the deep femoral vein and the common femoral vein is created without constricting the profunda femoris vein (Fig. 3a–d). It is essential to avoid a proximal stump on the SFV due to the risk of possible thrombus formation and subsequent ascending phlebothrombosis [51]. In the knee joint, the distal vein stump is tied off peripherally according to the length required and following vein excision, oversewn with a continuous suture or ligated (Fig. 4a,b). Clamping and excision of the vein is only performed once all venous side branches have been identified and ligated. Prior to ligation, heparin can then be administered systemically where necessary, if arterial dissection has possibly already been completed by a second team and the arterial component of surgery can be initiated. The harvested vein is then removed from its bed without damaging arterial collaterals, carefully distended by means of filling with heparinized NaCl solution and inspected for possible leaks (Fig. 5). Where necessary, these are oversewn with a thin polypropylene suture.
The harvested vein can be grafted either in a reverse position (with preserved venous valves) or in a non-reversed position if valve destruction has taken place. The vein normally tapers peripherally, meaning that, as a basic principle, one should consider orthograde grafting and venous valve removal. The author Dr. Neufang always removes venous valves as a matter of routine, not least to prevent possible clot formation or subsequent stenosis on the comparatively large and rigid valves. Venous valves are destroyed according to the Valentine technique using a retrograde Mills valvulotome, as with the GSV, by cutting the valvular leaflet [26, 47]. As SFV valves can be relatively rigid, this type of valve destruction can be challenging in individual cases and may cause damage to the vein wall. For this reason, the author Dr. Neufang prefers the technique described for open valve excision via stepwise eversion of the vein [51]. Coming from a proximal direction with long, fine forceps, the first valve is packed and the vein is then everted distally until the valve plane is completely visible. The two leaflets are then sparingly excised under direct vision (magnifying spectacles) with fine scissors without damaging the wall; then, after gripping the next valve leaflet, the next valve plane is everted until stepwise all valves have been exposed and excised. At the same time, a fine clamp on the distal vein end prevents unintentional complete eversion of the vein (Fig. 6a–e). Finally, following complete valve excision, the vein is returned to its original direction. If an inspection of the vein by means of careful distension reveals marked ectatic segments (possibly in the area of the valve planes) with a diameter greater than 1 cm, continuous oversewing of these segments with a thin polypropylene suture (6.0) can be performed in order to adjust the lumen or prevent subsequent dilatation of the vascular segment [26]. Vein segments subject to postphlebitic changes should be excised and discarded [26].
If necessary due to the extent of arterial reconstruction, the veins harvested from both legs, if they are of the required length, can be joined to form a long graft by means of an angled anastomosis or a neobirfurcation (Fig. 7 and 8) created for abdominal aortic repair by means of a side-to-side anastomosis. In the case of insufficient graft length, an alternative vein (e. g. an upper extremity vein) can be additionally integrated in the structure. The thus prepared venous graft can then either be placed in the carefully debrided and rinsed site following excision of the infected graft or native artery or, in the case of a different surgical indication, placed in the usual manner by means of tunnelling the bypass graft. Whenever graft tunnelling is required, the side branches should be oversewn and the use of vein clips dispensed with in order to avoid tearing off of the clips and the resulting risk of severe bleeding.
Once hemostasis has been achieved and several wound drains have been placed, wound closure following vein harvest is performed most simply with multilayer continuous suturing during fascial closure. It is important to ensure that a wound drain is also placed deep in the harvest bed. Depending on the amount of exudate, these drains can be left in place for several days. Postoperative mobilization of the patient is determined by the respective surgical indications and the individual course, particularly in the case of extensive abdominal procedures. If the arterial femoropopliteal axis is intact, an anti-embolism stocking can already be worn or the leg bound with an elastic bandage in the early postoperative phase.
We know from historical reports on the (no longer practiced) invasive treatment of deep vein thrombosis at the femoral level that SFV ligation to prevent pulmonary emboli caused clinically relevant edema in the operated leg in only a very small number of cases [52, 53]. In the case of a patent profunda femoralis vein, this was described in only 14 % of cases [54]; however, a high rate of venous congestion was reported if the common femoral vein was also affected [55]. Although deep venous reflux plays a lesser role in the formation of congestion-related venous ulceration compared with reflux in the superficial veins, it is more pronounced if clinical symptoms are more advanced [5659].
From the outset of SFV use as a vascular replacement, fears understandably circulated regarding harvest-related impairment to venous return and possible associated acute and chronic venous complications, including the risk of amputation of the affected limb. In the comparative series on femoropopliteal reconstructions using the SFV or GSV published in 1987, Schulman et al. analyzed ankle circumference in the affected leg and observed a decline in circumference increase of 0.5–1 cm over time following SFV harvest. None of the 116 patients who underwent SFV bypass surgery were affected by long-term disability caused by edema or ulceration in the further course [1]. Coburn, with his own working group, was the second author to devote himself to the technique applied only by Schulman et al. up to that point and, after presenting the results, found himself confronted with an intensive discussion, as in contrast to Schulman et al. the publication reported serious complications following SFV harvesting [4]. In a small series of seven patients in 1993, Coburn et al. described two cases of severe venous outflow obstruction in the form of phlegmasia following SFV and popliteal vein harvest. Emergency venous bypass using a polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) graft was necessary in one case, while limb amputation above the knee was required in another case [4]; however, vein harvest was performed to far below the knee, in some cases to distal of the anterior tibial vein inflow, in five out of seven cases, in addition to which preoperative phlebographic assessment of the deep vein system had been dispensed with. They observed severe chronic edema that responded poorly to local compression therapy in three further cases involving extensive vein harvest of this kind. In all three of these cases, however, the vein was similarly harvested to the distal popliteal vein [4]. In contrast to this study Sladen et al. reported on a series of 25 interventions involving SFV harvest performed primarily for critical ischemia [26]. With the exception of one case, they avoided vein harvest to below the knee. Clinically relevant edema as a result of vein harvest was seen in four cases (20 % of cases at 1 year); however, one patient reported significantly more painful edema at 1 year. In this case again, extensive vein harvest to the level of the distal popliteal fossa had been performed [26].
Clagett’s working group concentrated intensive efforts on the clinical application of the SFV in a variety of indications and also analyzed the potential negative effects of harvesting on the residual venous system. By means of clinical examination, venous duplex sonography and venous functional tests, Wells et al. followed up 61 patients with 86 SFV harvests at 6‑month intervals [49]. No correlation was seen between postoperative swelling and the presence of a preoperatively intact GSV. Although plesmography indicated impaired venous outflow in 93 % following SFV harvest, this was reflected in a low reflux rate of only 11 % in lower leg veins. Moreover, whilst venous pressure during exercise was significantly elevated, this normalized rapidly and, in some cases, decreased again over time under serial observation [49]. No cases of venous ulceration or venous claudication were seen in this series. Instead, ultrasound revealed large caliber collateral vessels with a diameter of 4–6 mm from the popliteal vein in a central direction in 34 % of cases. Distinctly smaller caliber collateral vessels were identified in all other cases [49]. The same working group also investigated the effects of SFV harvest in terms of the development of acute postoperative venous hypertension and the need to relieve pressure by means of fasciotomy [60]. The authors analyzed data from 264 SFV harvests taken from 162 patients and found that the rate of fasciotomy in the aortoiliac axis (20.7 %) increased particularly in those cases with low preoperative ankle-brachial index (ABI) or higher intraoperative fluid administration. It was also more likely to be required in the case of concurrent harvest of the ipsilateral GSV. On the other hand, fasciotomy was not required when the SFV was used in other regions [60]. Thus, the authors recommended considering prophylactic fasciotomy in aortoiliac procedures in the case of severe ischemia and extensive vein harvesting or, at least, monitoring patients undergoing aortoiliac interventions correspondingly during the postoperative phase [60].
Using duplex sonography and venous function tests Modrall et al. clinically examined 27 legs following SFV harvest over a mean follow-up time of 70 months [61]. They found signs of chronic venous insufficiency with persistent swelling in 14.8 % of surgically treated legs (four cases). Edema was mild and easily controlled in two cases, one case of edema accompanied by skin changes was seen, as was one case of healed venous ulcer. Here again, a correlation was seen between the development of chronic venous insufficiency and concurrent harvest of the GSV and the SFV. An earlier case of GSV harvest on the other hand showed no negative effects in this respect. A further 46 patients could only be surveyed by telephone without undergoing clinical examination. Of these patients 15.2 % reported chronic edema in the leg operated on, whilst no respondents reported ulceration [61]. In the most recent study available, conducted in Mainz, Germany, the working group under Dorweiler reported mild edema in 21 % of cases at 24 months following SFV harvest to treat infection in the aortoiliofemoral region [12]. No severe impairment to venous outflow accompanied by marked clinical symptoms was seen in any of the 67 patients in this series (see Table 2).
Table 2
Long-term venous complications following superficial femoral vein harvest
Author
Year
n
Follow-up period
Edema
Measure
Severe venous complications
Ulceration
Schulman et al. [1]
1987
65
Circumference increase of 0.5–1 cm compared with GSV group
n. s.
None
Coburn et al.[4]
1993
7
7
Compression stocking
2 (1 venous bypass, 1 amputation)
Sladen et al. [26]
1994
25
24 months
20 % (4 patients)
Lower leg compression stocking
1 patient with painful edema at 12 months
no ulceration
Nevelsteen et al. [16]
1995
15
17 months
1/13
Compression stocking
None
Clagett et al. [10]
1997
41
32 months
10 % (4 patients)
Compression stocking
None
Wells et al. [49]
1999
86 legs
37 months
31 %
13 % compression stocking
None
Modrall et al.[61]
2007
27 legs
70 months
14.8 %
n. s.
1 resolved ulcer
Dorweiler et al.[12]
2014
84 legs
24 months
21 %
4 patients with compression stockings
None
GSV great saphenous vein, n.s. not significant
The role of thrombosis in the popliteal vein stump and tibial veins observed on postoperative duplex sonography following SFV harvest remains unclear. Although often clinically asymptomatic, this phenomenon was seen in up to 22 % of cases [12, 49]. Whilst embolic complications are not expected, one can speculate as to whether they promote chronic venous insufficiency. According to own experience, complete lysis of thrombosis occurs in 50 % of cases in the early postoperative months [12]; nevertheless, there is a fundamental risk of central thromboembolic complications following SFV harvest. Dhannisetty et al. reported on a series of 58 SFV harvests in 57 patients [62]. Of these procedures 47 % were performed due to vascular involvement in the context of cancer surgery, primarily for portomesenteric reconstruction. The authors observed a significantly higher incidence of thromboembolisms in cancer patients of 52 % compared with 10 % in cancer-free patients. All cases of venous thrombosis proximal to the SFV harvest site or in the contralateral extremity were seen in the cancer patients, as was the one case of pulmonary embolism. Venous thrombosis was not observed in patients receiving thromboprophylaxis for other indications (i.e. atrial fibrillation, hypercoagulability and history of thromboembolism) [62]. The authors concluded that normal postoperative thromboprophylaxis and duplex sonography of the deep vein system according to symptoms is adequate in patients without malignancies, whereas prolonged thromboprophylaxis in conjuction with routine duplex sonography of the deep vein system is indicated in cancer patients [62]. Other authors, in contrast, declare this approach to be inadequate and proposed routine full anticoagulation with low molecular weight heparin for 30 days; however, these authors’ experience was limited to dialysis shunt placement using the SFV [63].
Under the assumption that at least one intact valve in the popliteal vein, as well as a significant proximal collateral, is needed to guarantee unimpaired venous outflow, Santilli et al. carried out a pathoanatomical investigation of the deep vein system on cadaveric specimens to test this assumption [64]. According to this analysis, 15 cm of the popliteal vein in males (height 170 cm) and 12 cm in females (height 150 cm) can be harvested distal to the adductor hiatus in addition to the SFV in order to guarantee a “safe” harvest while preserving a valve-bearing popliteal segment and a venous collaterals without compromising venous outflow. This can be performed with 95 % confidence of preserving at least one valve and one collateral vein [64].

Conclusion

The use of the SFV as an autologous vascular graft is a proven reconstructive procedure with a wide range of indications. The vein itself is ideal for aortoiliac repair, particularly in vascular surgery due to infections. Severe adverse sequelae in the residual deep venous system and the respective extremity are not anticipated if peripheral harvest is limited to the proximal popliteal vein.

Compliance with ethical guidelines

Conflict of interests

A. Neufang and S. Savvidis state that there are no conflicts of interest.
The accompanying manuscript does not include any studies on humans or animals. Informed consent was obtained from all patients identifiable from images or other information within the manuscript.
The supplement containing this article is not sponsored by industry.
Open Access. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://​creativecommons.​org/​licenses/​by/​4.​0/​), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Unsere Produktempfehlungen

Die Chirurgie

Print-Titel

Das Abo mit mehr Tiefe

Mit der Zeitschrift Die Chirurgie erhalten Sie zusätzlich Online-Zugriff auf weitere 43 chirurgische Fachzeitschriften, CME-Fortbildungen, Webinare, Vorbereitungskursen zur Facharztprüfung und die digitale Enzyklopädie e.Medpedia.

Bis 30. April 2024 bestellen und im ersten Jahr nur 199 € zahlen!

e.Med Interdisziplinär

Kombi-Abonnement

Für Ihren Erfolg in Klinik und Praxis - Die beste Hilfe in Ihrem Arbeitsalltag

Mit e.Med Interdisziplinär erhalten Sie Zugang zu allen CME-Fortbildungen und Fachzeitschriften auf SpringerMedizin.de.

Gefässchirurgie

Print-Titel

Themenschwerpunkte zu aktuellen Entwicklungen in der vaskulären und endovaskulären Gefäßmedizin. Vermittlung von relevantem Hintergrundwissen und Bewertung wissenschaftlicher Ergebnisse. Konkrete Handlungsempfehlungen.

Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Schulman ML, Badhey MR, Yatco R (1987) Superficial femoral-popliteal veins and reversed saphenous veins as primary femoropopliteal bypass grafts: A randomized comparative study. J Vasc Surg 6:1–10CrossRefPubMed Schulman ML, Badhey MR, Yatco R (1987) Superficial femoral-popliteal veins and reversed saphenous veins as primary femoropopliteal bypass grafts: A randomized comparative study. J Vasc Surg 6:1–10CrossRefPubMed
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Schulman ML, Badhey MR, Yatco R, Pillari G (1986) A saphenous alternative: Preferential use of superficial femoral and popliteal veins as femoropopliteal bypass grafts. Am J Surg 152:231–237CrossRefPubMed Schulman ML, Badhey MR, Yatco R, Pillari G (1986) A saphenous alternative: Preferential use of superficial femoral and popliteal veins as femoropopliteal bypass grafts. Am J Surg 152:231–237CrossRefPubMed
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Schulman ML, Badhey MR, Yatco R, Pillari G (1986) An 11-year experience with deep leg veins as femoropopliteal bypass grafts. arch Surg 121:1010–1015CrossRefPubMed Schulman ML, Badhey MR, Yatco R, Pillari G (1986) An 11-year experience with deep leg veins as femoropopliteal bypass grafts. arch Surg 121:1010–1015CrossRefPubMed
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Coburn M, Ashworth C, Francis W, Morin C, Broukhim M, Carney WI Jr. (1993) Venous stasis complications of the use of the superficial femoral and popliteal veins for lower extremity bypass [see comments]. J Vasc Surg 17:1005–1009CrossRefPubMed Coburn M, Ashworth C, Francis W, Morin C, Broukhim M, Carney WI Jr. (1993) Venous stasis complications of the use of the superficial femoral and popliteal veins for lower extremity bypass [see comments]. J Vasc Surg 17:1005–1009CrossRefPubMed
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Schanzer H, Chiang K, Mabrouk M, Peirce EC (1991) Use of lower extremity deep veins as arterial substitutes: Functional status of the donor leg. J Vasc Surg 14:624–627CrossRefPubMed Schanzer H, Chiang K, Mabrouk M, Peirce EC (1991) Use of lower extremity deep veins as arterial substitutes: Functional status of the donor leg. J Vasc Surg 14:624–627CrossRefPubMed
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Clagett GP, Bowers BL, Lopez-Viego MA, Rossi MB, Valentine RJ, Myers SI et al (1993) Creation of a neo-aortoiliac system from lower extremity deep and superficial veins. Ann Surg 218:239–248CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Clagett GP, Bowers BL, Lopez-Viego MA, Rossi MB, Valentine RJ, Myers SI et al (1993) Creation of a neo-aortoiliac system from lower extremity deep and superficial veins. Ann Surg 218:239–248CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Nevelsteen A, Lacroix H, Suy R (1993) The superficial femoral vein as autogenous conduit in the treatment of prosthetic arterial infection. Ann Vasc Surg 7:556–560CrossRefPubMed Nevelsteen A, Lacroix H, Suy R (1993) The superficial femoral vein as autogenous conduit in the treatment of prosthetic arterial infection. Ann Vasc Surg 7:556–560CrossRefPubMed
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Krasinski Z, Biskupski P, Dzieciuchowicz L, Kaczmarek E, Krasinska B, Staniszewski R et al (2010) The influence of elastic components of the venous wall on the biomechanical properties of different veins used for arterial reconstruction. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 40:224–229CrossRefPubMed Krasinski Z, Biskupski P, Dzieciuchowicz L, Kaczmarek E, Krasinska B, Staniszewski R et al (2010) The influence of elastic components of the venous wall on the biomechanical properties of different veins used for arterial reconstruction. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 40:224–229CrossRefPubMed
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Ali AT, Modrall JG, Hocking J, Valentine RJ, Spencer H, Eidt JF et al (2009) Long-term results of the treatment of aortic graft infection by in situ replacement with femoral popliteal vein grafts. J Vasc Surg 50:30–39CrossRefPubMed Ali AT, Modrall JG, Hocking J, Valentine RJ, Spencer H, Eidt JF et al (2009) Long-term results of the treatment of aortic graft infection by in situ replacement with femoral popliteal vein grafts. J Vasc Surg 50:30–39CrossRefPubMed
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Clagett GP, Valentine RJ, Hagino RT (1997) Autogenous aortoiliac/femoral reconstruction from superficial femoral-popliteal veins: Feasibility and durability. J Vasc Surg 25:255–270CrossRefPubMed Clagett GP, Valentine RJ, Hagino RT (1997) Autogenous aortoiliac/femoral reconstruction from superficial femoral-popliteal veins: Feasibility and durability. J Vasc Surg 25:255–270CrossRefPubMed
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Daenens K, Fourneau I, Nevelsteen A (2003) Ten-year experience in autogenous reconstruction with the femoral vein in the treatment of aortofemoral prosthetic infection. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 25:240–245CrossRefPubMed Daenens K, Fourneau I, Nevelsteen A (2003) Ten-year experience in autogenous reconstruction with the femoral vein in the treatment of aortofemoral prosthetic infection. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 25:240–245CrossRefPubMed
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Dorweiler B, Neufang A, Chaban R, Reinstadler J, Duenschede F, Vahl CF (2014) Use and durability of femoral vein for autologous reconstruction with infection of the aortoiliofemoral axis. J Vasc Surg 59:675–683CrossRefPubMed Dorweiler B, Neufang A, Chaban R, Reinstadler J, Duenschede F, Vahl CF (2014) Use and durability of femoral vein for autologous reconstruction with infection of the aortoiliofemoral axis. J Vasc Surg 59:675–683CrossRefPubMed
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Ehsan O, Gibbons CP (2009) A 10-year experience of using femoro-popliteal vein for re-vascularisation in graft and arterial infections. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 38:172–179CrossRefPubMed Ehsan O, Gibbons CP (2009) A 10-year experience of using femoro-popliteal vein for re-vascularisation in graft and arterial infections. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 38:172–179CrossRefPubMed
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Franke S, Voit R (1997) The superficial femoral vein as arterial substitute in infections of the aortoiliac region. Ann Vasc Surg 11:406–412CrossRefPubMed Franke S, Voit R (1997) The superficial femoral vein as arterial substitute in infections of the aortoiliac region. Ann Vasc Surg 11:406–412CrossRefPubMed
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Heinola I, Kantonen I, Jaroma M, Alback A, Vikatmaa P, Aho P et al (2015) Treatment of aortic prosthesis infections by graft removal and in situ replacement with autologous femoral veins and fascial strengthening. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2016.01.016 PubMed Heinola I, Kantonen I, Jaroma M, Alback A, Vikatmaa P, Aho P et al (2015) Treatment of aortic prosthesis infections by graft removal and in situ replacement with autologous femoral veins and fascial strengthening. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. doi:10.​1016/​j.​jvs.​2016.​01.​016 PubMed
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Nevelsteen A, Lacroix H, Suy R (1995) Autogenous reconstruction with the lower extremity deep veins: An alternative treatment of prosthetic infection after reconstructive surgery for aortoiliac disease. J Vasc Surg 22:129–134CrossRefPubMed Nevelsteen A, Lacroix H, Suy R (1995) Autogenous reconstruction with the lower extremity deep veins: An alternative treatment of prosthetic infection after reconstructive surgery for aortoiliac disease. J Vasc Surg 22:129–134CrossRefPubMed
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Davila VJ, Stone W, Duncan AA, Wood E, Jordan WD Jr., Zea N et al (2015) A multicenter experience with the surgical treatment of infected abdominal aortic endografts. J Vasc Surg 62:877–883CrossRefPubMed Davila VJ, Stone W, Duncan AA, Wood E, Jordan WD Jr., Zea N et al (2015) A multicenter experience with the surgical treatment of infected abdominal aortic endografts. J Vasc Surg 62:877–883CrossRefPubMed
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Fatima J, Duncan AA, de Grandis E, Oderich GS, Kalra M, Gloviczki P et al (2013) Treatment strategies and outcomes in patients with infected aortic endografts. J Vasc Surg 58:371–379CrossRefPubMed Fatima J, Duncan AA, de Grandis E, Oderich GS, Kalra M, Gloviczki P et al (2013) Treatment strategies and outcomes in patients with infected aortic endografts. J Vasc Surg 58:371–379CrossRefPubMed
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Sternbergh WC 3rd, Money SR (2005) Iliac artery stent infection treated with superficial femoral vein. J Vasc Surg 41:348CrossRefPubMed Sternbergh WC 3rd, Money SR (2005) Iliac artery stent infection treated with superficial femoral vein. J Vasc Surg 41:348CrossRefPubMed
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Okamoto H, Tamenishi A, Matsumura Y, Niimi T (2012) Composite vein graft reconstruction for infected descending aortic prosthesis. Ann Thorac Surg 93:2061–2063CrossRefPubMed Okamoto H, Tamenishi A, Matsumura Y, Niimi T (2012) Composite vein graft reconstruction for infected descending aortic prosthesis. Ann Thorac Surg 93:2061–2063CrossRefPubMed
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Tambyraja AL, Wyatt MG, Clarke MJ, Chalmers RT (2003) Autologous deep vein reconstruction of infected thoracoabdominal aortic patch graft. J Vasc Surg 38:852–854CrossRefPubMed Tambyraja AL, Wyatt MG, Clarke MJ, Chalmers RT (2003) Autologous deep vein reconstruction of infected thoracoabdominal aortic patch graft. J Vasc Surg 38:852–854CrossRefPubMed
22.
Zurück zum Zitat D’Addio V, Ali A, Timaran C, Siragusa T, Valentine J, Arko F et al (2005) Femorofemoral bypass with femoral popliteal vein. J Vasc Surg 42:35–39CrossRefPubMed D’Addio V, Ali A, Timaran C, Siragusa T, Valentine J, Arko F et al (2005) Femorofemoral bypass with femoral popliteal vein. J Vasc Surg 42:35–39CrossRefPubMed
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Jackson MR, Ali AT, Bell C, Modrall JG, Welborn MB 3rd, Scoggins E et al (2004) Aortofemoral bypass in young patients with premature atherosclerosis: Is superficial femoral vein superior to dacron? J Vasc Surg 40:17–23CrossRefPubMed Jackson MR, Ali AT, Bell C, Modrall JG, Welborn MB 3rd, Scoggins E et al (2004) Aortofemoral bypass in young patients with premature atherosclerosis: Is superficial femoral vein superior to dacron? J Vasc Surg 40:17–23CrossRefPubMed
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Gibbons CP, Osman HY, Shiralkar S (2003) The use of alternative sources of autologous vein for infrainguinal bypass. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 25:93–94CrossRefPubMed Gibbons CP, Osman HY, Shiralkar S (2003) The use of alternative sources of autologous vein for infrainguinal bypass. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 25:93–94CrossRefPubMed
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Kaczynski J, Gibbons CP (2011) Experience with femoral vein grafts for infra-inguinal bypass. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 41:676–678CrossRefPubMed Kaczynski J, Gibbons CP (2011) Experience with femoral vein grafts for infra-inguinal bypass. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 41:676–678CrossRefPubMed
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Sladen JG, Reid JD, Maxwell TM, Downs AR (1994) Superficial femoral vein: A useful autogenous harvest site. J Vasc Surg 20:947–952CrossRefPubMed Sladen JG, Reid JD, Maxwell TM, Downs AR (1994) Superficial femoral vein: A useful autogenous harvest site. J Vasc Surg 20:947–952CrossRefPubMed
27.
Zurück zum Zitat Wozniak G, Gortz H, Akinturk H, Dapper F, Hehrlein F, Alemany J (1998) Superficial femoral vein in arterial reconstruction for limb salvage: Outcome and fate of venous circulation. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino) 39:405–411 Wozniak G, Gortz H, Akinturk H, Dapper F, Hehrlein F, Alemany J (1998) Superficial femoral vein in arterial reconstruction for limb salvage: Outcome and fate of venous circulation. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino) 39:405–411
28.
Zurück zum Zitat Modrall JG, Sadjadi J, Joiner DR, Ali A, Welborn MB 3rd, Jackson MR et al (2003) Comparison of superficial femoral vein and saphenous vein as conduits for mesenteric arterial bypass. J Vasc Surg 37:362–366CrossRefPubMed Modrall JG, Sadjadi J, Joiner DR, Ali A, Welborn MB 3rd, Jackson MR et al (2003) Comparison of superficial femoral vein and saphenous vein as conduits for mesenteric arterial bypass. J Vasc Surg 37:362–366CrossRefPubMed
29.
Zurück zum Zitat Tulip HH, Smith SV, Valentine RJ (2012) Delayed reconstruction of the superior mesenteric vein with autogenous femoral vein. J Vasc Surg 55:1773–1774CrossRefPubMed Tulip HH, Smith SV, Valentine RJ (2012) Delayed reconstruction of the superior mesenteric vein with autogenous femoral vein. J Vasc Surg 55:1773–1774CrossRefPubMed
30.
Zurück zum Zitat Modrall JG, Joiner DR, Seidel SA, Jackson MR, Valentine RJ, Clagett GP (2002) Superficial femoral-popliteal vein as a conduit for brachiocephalic arterial reconstructions. Ann Vasc Surg 16:17–23CrossRefPubMed Modrall JG, Joiner DR, Seidel SA, Jackson MR, Valentine RJ, Clagett GP (2002) Superficial femoral-popliteal vein as a conduit for brachiocephalic arterial reconstructions. Ann Vasc Surg 16:17–23CrossRefPubMed
31.
Zurück zum Zitat Schindler N, Calligaro KD, Dougherty MJ, Diehl J, Modi KH, Braffman MN (2002) Melioidosis presenting as an infected intrathoracic subclavian artery pseudoaneurysm treated with femoral vein interposition graft. J Vasc Surg 35:569–572CrossRefPubMed Schindler N, Calligaro KD, Dougherty MJ, Diehl J, Modi KH, Braffman MN (2002) Melioidosis presenting as an infected intrathoracic subclavian artery pseudoaneurysm treated with femoral vein interposition graft. J Vasc Surg 35:569–572CrossRefPubMed
32.
Zurück zum Zitat Hagino RT, Bengtson TD, Fosdick DA, Valentine RJ, Clagett GP (1997) Venous reconstructions using the superficial femoral-popliteal vein. J Vasc Surg 26:829–837CrossRefPubMed Hagino RT, Bengtson TD, Fosdick DA, Valentine RJ, Clagett GP (1997) Venous reconstructions using the superficial femoral-popliteal vein. J Vasc Surg 26:829–837CrossRefPubMed
33.
Zurück zum Zitat Erbella J, Hess PJ, Huber TS (2006) Superior vena cava bypass with superficial femoral vein for benign superior vena cava syndrome. Ann Vasc Surg 20:834–838CrossRefPubMed Erbella J, Hess PJ, Huber TS (2006) Superior vena cava bypass with superficial femoral vein for benign superior vena cava syndrome. Ann Vasc Surg 20:834–838CrossRefPubMed
34.
Zurück zum Zitat Eshtaya E, Legare JF, Sullivan JA, Friesen CL (2008) Great mediastinal vein reconstruction using autologous superficial femoral vein superficial femoral vein graft. J Card Surg 23:736–738CrossRefPubMed Eshtaya E, Legare JF, Sullivan JA, Friesen CL (2008) Great mediastinal vein reconstruction using autologous superficial femoral vein superficial femoral vein graft. J Card Surg 23:736–738CrossRefPubMed
35.
Zurück zum Zitat Gladstone DJ, Pillai R, Paneth M, Lincoln JC (1985) Relief of superior vena caval syndrome with autologous femoral vein used as a bypass graft. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 89:750–752PubMed Gladstone DJ, Pillai R, Paneth M, Lincoln JC (1985) Relief of superior vena caval syndrome with autologous femoral vein used as a bypass graft. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 89:750–752PubMed
36.
Zurück zum Zitat Kanno M, Hoshino S, Iwaya F, Itabashi K, Igari T, Takano K et al (1981) Bypass operation using autofemoral vein graft for superior vena cava syndrome (author’s transl). Kyobu Geka 34:715–719PubMed Kanno M, Hoshino S, Iwaya F, Itabashi K, Igari T, Takano K et al (1981) Bypass operation using autofemoral vein graft for superior vena cava syndrome (author’s transl). Kyobu Geka 34:715–719PubMed
37.
Zurück zum Zitat Kennedy DP, Palit TK (2010) Reconstruction of superior vena cava syndrome due to benign disease using superficial femoral vein. Ann Vasc Surg 24:555.e7–555.e12CrossRef Kennedy DP, Palit TK (2010) Reconstruction of superior vena cava syndrome due to benign disease using superficial femoral vein. Ann Vasc Surg 24:555.e7–555.e12CrossRef
38.
Zurück zum Zitat Klima U, Mair R, Gross C, Peschl F, Wimmer-Greinecker G, Brucke P (1994) Use of autologous femoral vein in superior vena cava thrombosis. Case report and review of the literature. Langenbecks Arch Chir 379:120–122CrossRefPubMed Klima U, Mair R, Gross C, Peschl F, Wimmer-Greinecker G, Brucke P (1994) Use of autologous femoral vein in superior vena cava thrombosis. Case report and review of the literature. Langenbecks Arch Chir 379:120–122CrossRefPubMed
39.
Zurück zum Zitat Bower TC, Nagorney DM, Cherry KJ Jr., Toomey BJ, Hallett JW, Panneton JM et al (2000) Replacement of the inferior vena cava for malignancy: An update. J Vasc Surg 31:270–281CrossRefPubMed Bower TC, Nagorney DM, Cherry KJ Jr., Toomey BJ, Hallett JW, Panneton JM et al (2000) Replacement of the inferior vena cava for malignancy: An update. J Vasc Surg 31:270–281CrossRefPubMed
40.
Zurück zum Zitat DuBay DA, Lindsay T, Swallow C, McGilvray I (2009) A cylindrical femoral vein panel graft for caval reconstructions. J Vasc Surg 49:255–259CrossRefPubMed DuBay DA, Lindsay T, Swallow C, McGilvray I (2009) A cylindrical femoral vein panel graft for caval reconstructions. J Vasc Surg 49:255–259CrossRefPubMed
41.
Zurück zum Zitat Schwartz ME, Schanzer H, Miller CM (1991) Use of the superficial femoral vein as a replacement for large veins. J Vasc Surg 13:460–461CrossRefPubMed Schwartz ME, Schanzer H, Miller CM (1991) Use of the superficial femoral vein as a replacement for large veins. J Vasc Surg 13:460–461CrossRefPubMed
42.
Zurück zum Zitat Lee DY, Mitchell EL, Jones MA, Landry GJ, Liem TK, Sheppard BC et al (2010) Techniques and results of portal vein/superior mesenteric vein reconstruction using femoral and saphenous vein during pancreaticoduodenectomy. J Vasc Surg 51:662–666CrossRefPubMed Lee DY, Mitchell EL, Jones MA, Landry GJ, Liem TK, Sheppard BC et al (2010) Techniques and results of portal vein/superior mesenteric vein reconstruction using femoral and saphenous vein during pancreaticoduodenectomy. J Vasc Surg 51:662–666CrossRefPubMed
43.
Zurück zum Zitat White JS, Medlicott SA, Brown H, Moore R, Temple W (2005) Intravascular synovial sarcoma of the external iliac vein and reconstruction with the superficial femoral vein. J Vasc Surg 42:365–367CrossRefPubMed White JS, Medlicott SA, Brown H, Moore R, Temple W (2005) Intravascular synovial sarcoma of the external iliac vein and reconstruction with the superficial femoral vein. J Vasc Surg 42:365–367CrossRefPubMed
44.
Zurück zum Zitat Bourquelot P, Rawa M, Van Laere O, Franco G (2012) Long-term results of femoral vein transposition for autogenous arteriovenous hemodialysis access. J Vasc Surg 56:440–445CrossRefPubMed Bourquelot P, Rawa M, Van Laere O, Franco G (2012) Long-term results of femoral vein transposition for autogenous arteriovenous hemodialysis access. J Vasc Surg 56:440–445CrossRefPubMed
45.
Zurück zum Zitat Gilbert JA, Gibbs PJ (2011) Good long term patency rates associated with an alternative technique in vascular access surgery – the adductor loop arteriovenous graft. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 41:566–569CrossRefPubMed Gilbert JA, Gibbs PJ (2011) Good long term patency rates associated with an alternative technique in vascular access surgery – the adductor loop arteriovenous graft. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 41:566–569CrossRefPubMed
46.
Zurück zum Zitat Gradman WS, Cohen W, Haji-Aghaii M (2001) Arteriovenous fistula construction in the thigh with transposed superficial femoral vein: Our initial experience. J Vasc Surg 33:968–975CrossRefPubMed Gradman WS, Cohen W, Haji-Aghaii M (2001) Arteriovenous fistula construction in the thigh with transposed superficial femoral vein: Our initial experience. J Vasc Surg 33:968–975CrossRefPubMed
47.
Zurück zum Zitat Valentine RJ (2000) Harvesting the superficial femoral vein as an autograft. Semin Vasc Surg 13:27–31PubMed Valentine RJ (2000) Harvesting the superficial femoral vein as an autograft. Semin Vasc Surg 13:27–31PubMed
48.
Zurück zum Zitat Raju S, Fountain T, Neglen P, Devidas M (1998) Axial transformation of the profunda femoris vein. J Vasc Surg 27:651–659CrossRefPubMed Raju S, Fountain T, Neglen P, Devidas M (1998) Axial transformation of the profunda femoris vein. J Vasc Surg 27:651–659CrossRefPubMed
49.
Zurück zum Zitat Wells JK, Hagino RT, Bargmann KM, Jackson MR, Valentine RJ, Kakish HB et al (1999) Venous morbidity after superficial femoral-popliteal vein harvest. J Vasc Surg 29:282–291CrossRefPubMed Wells JK, Hagino RT, Bargmann KM, Jackson MR, Valentine RJ, Kakish HB et al (1999) Venous morbidity after superficial femoral-popliteal vein harvest. J Vasc Surg 29:282–291CrossRefPubMed
50.
Zurück zum Zitat Gordon AC, Wright I, Pugh ND (1996) Duplication of the superficial femoral vein: Recognition with duplex ultrasonography. Clin Radiol 51:622–624CrossRefPubMed Gordon AC, Wright I, Pugh ND (1996) Duplication of the superficial femoral vein: Recognition with duplex ultrasonography. Clin Radiol 51:622–624CrossRefPubMed
51.
Zurück zum Zitat Smith ST, Clagett GP (2008) Femoral vein harvest for vascular reconstructions: Pitfalls and tips for success. Semin Vasc Surg 21:35–40CrossRefPubMed Smith ST, Clagett GP (2008) Femoral vein harvest for vascular reconstructions: Pitfalls and tips for success. Semin Vasc Surg 21:35–40CrossRefPubMed
52.
Zurück zum Zitat Allen AW (1949) The present evaluation of the prophylaxis and treatment of venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. Surgery 26:1–7PubMed Allen AW (1949) The present evaluation of the prophylaxis and treatment of venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. Surgery 26:1–7PubMed
53.
Zurück zum Zitat Szilagyi DE, Alsop JF (1949) Early and late sequelae of therapeutic vein ligation for thrombosis of veins of lower limbs. arch Surg 59:633–666CrossRefPubMed Szilagyi DE, Alsop JF (1949) Early and late sequelae of therapeutic vein ligation for thrombosis of veins of lower limbs. arch Surg 59:633–666CrossRefPubMed
54.
Zurück zum Zitat Masuda EM, Kistner RL, Ferris EB 3rd (1992) Long-term effects of superficial femoral vein ligation: Thirteen-year follow-up. J Vasc Surg 16:741–749CrossRefPubMed Masuda EM, Kistner RL, Ferris EB 3rd (1992) Long-term effects of superficial femoral vein ligation: Thirteen-year follow-up. J Vasc Surg 16:741–749CrossRefPubMed
55.
Zurück zum Zitat Robinson JR, Moyer CA (1954) Comparison of late sequelae of common and superficial femoral vein ligations. Surgery 35:690–697PubMed Robinson JR, Moyer CA (1954) Comparison of late sequelae of common and superficial femoral vein ligations. Surgery 35:690–697PubMed
56.
Zurück zum Zitat Labropoulos N, Delis K, Nicolaides AN, Leon M, Ramaswami G (1996) The role of the distribution and anatomic extent of reflux in the development of signs and symptoms in chronic venous insufficiency. J Vasc Surg 23:504–510CrossRefPubMed Labropoulos N, Delis K, Nicolaides AN, Leon M, Ramaswami G (1996) The role of the distribution and anatomic extent of reflux in the development of signs and symptoms in chronic venous insufficiency. J Vasc Surg 23:504–510CrossRefPubMed
57.
Zurück zum Zitat Labropoulos N, Leon M, Nicolaides AN, Sowade O, Volteas N, Ortega F et al (1994) Venous reflux in patients with previous deep venous thrombosis: Correlation with ulceration and other symptoms. J Vasc Surg 20:20–26CrossRefPubMed Labropoulos N, Leon M, Nicolaides AN, Sowade O, Volteas N, Ortega F et al (1994) Venous reflux in patients with previous deep venous thrombosis: Correlation with ulceration and other symptoms. J Vasc Surg 20:20–26CrossRefPubMed
58.
Zurück zum Zitat Myers KA, Ziegenbein RW, Zeng GH, Matthews PG (1995) Duplex ultrasonography scanning for chronic venous disease: Patterns of venous reflux. J Vasc Surg 21:605–612CrossRefPubMed Myers KA, Ziegenbein RW, Zeng GH, Matthews PG (1995) Duplex ultrasonography scanning for chronic venous disease: Patterns of venous reflux. J Vasc Surg 21:605–612CrossRefPubMed
59.
Zurück zum Zitat Welch HJ, Young CM, Semegran AB, Iafrati MD, Mackey WC, O’Donnell TF Jr. (1996) Duplex assessment of venous reflux and chronic venous insufficiency: The significance of deep venous reflux. J Vasc Surg 24:755–762CrossRefPubMed Welch HJ, Young CM, Semegran AB, Iafrati MD, Mackey WC, O’Donnell TF Jr. (1996) Duplex assessment of venous reflux and chronic venous insufficiency: The significance of deep venous reflux. J Vasc Surg 24:755–762CrossRefPubMed
60.
Zurück zum Zitat Modrall JG, Sadjadi J, Ali AT, Anthony T, Welborn MB 3rd, Valentine RJ et al (2004) Deep vein harvest: Predicting need for fasciotomy. J Vasc Surg 39:387–394CrossRefPubMed Modrall JG, Sadjadi J, Ali AT, Anthony T, Welborn MB 3rd, Valentine RJ et al (2004) Deep vein harvest: Predicting need for fasciotomy. J Vasc Surg 39:387–394CrossRefPubMed
61.
Zurück zum Zitat Modrall JG, Hocking JA, Timaran CH, Rosero EB, Arko FR 3rd, Valentine RJ et al (2007) Late incidence of chronic venous insufficiency after deep vein harvest. J Vasc Surg 46:520–525CrossRefPubMed Modrall JG, Hocking JA, Timaran CH, Rosero EB, Arko FR 3rd, Valentine RJ et al (2007) Late incidence of chronic venous insufficiency after deep vein harvest. J Vasc Surg 46:520–525CrossRefPubMed
62.
Zurück zum Zitat Dhanisetty RV, Liem TK, Landry GJ, Sheppard BC, Mitchell EL, Moneta GL (2012) Symptomatic venous thromboembolism after femoral vein harvest. J Vasc Surg 56:696–702CrossRefPubMed Dhanisetty RV, Liem TK, Landry GJ, Sheppard BC, Mitchell EL, Moneta GL (2012) Symptomatic venous thromboembolism after femoral vein harvest. J Vasc Surg 56:696–702CrossRefPubMed
63.
Zurück zum Zitat Lazarides MK, Georgiadis GS, Georgakarakos EI, Papadaki EG (2013) Regarding “Symptomatic venous thromboembolism after femoral vein harvest”. J Vasc Surg 57:299–300CrossRefPubMed Lazarides MK, Georgiadis GS, Georgakarakos EI, Papadaki EG (2013) Regarding “Symptomatic venous thromboembolism after femoral vein harvest”. J Vasc Surg 57:299–300CrossRefPubMed
64.
Zurück zum Zitat Santilli SM, Lee ES, Wernsing SE, Diedrich DA, Kuskowski MA, Shew RL (2000) Superficial femoral popliteal vein: An anatomic study. J Vasc Surg 31:450–455CrossRefPubMed Santilli SM, Lee ES, Wernsing SE, Diedrich DA, Kuskowski MA, Shew RL (2000) Superficial femoral popliteal vein: An anatomic study. J Vasc Surg 31:450–455CrossRefPubMed
Metadaten
Titel
Operative technique and morbidity of superficial femoral vein harvest
verfasst von
PD Dr. A. Neufang
S. Savvidis
Publikationsdatum
01.08.2016
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
Gefässchirurgie / Ausgabe Sonderheft 2/2016
Print ISSN: 0948-7034
Elektronische ISSN: 1434-3932
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00772-016-0170-6

Weitere Artikel der Sonderheft 2/2016

Gefässchirurgie 2/2016 Zur Ausgabe

Update Chirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

S3-Leitlinie „Diagnostik und Therapie des Karpaltunnelsyndroms“

CME: 2 Punkte

Prof. Dr. med. Gregor Antoniadis Das Karpaltunnelsyndrom ist die häufigste Kompressionsneuropathie peripherer Nerven. Obwohl die Anamnese mit dem nächtlichen Einschlafen der Hand (Brachialgia parästhetica nocturna) sehr typisch ist, ist eine klinisch-neurologische Untersuchung und Elektroneurografie in manchen Fällen auch eine Neurosonografie erforderlich. Im Anfangsstadium sind konservative Maßnahmen (Handgelenksschiene, Ergotherapie) empfehlenswert. Bei nicht Ansprechen der konservativen Therapie oder Auftreten von neurologischen Ausfällen ist eine Dekompression des N. medianus am Karpaltunnel indiziert.

Prof. Dr. med. Gregor Antoniadis
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“

CME: 2 Punkte

Dr. med. Benjamin Meyknecht, PD Dr. med. Oliver Pieske Das Webinar S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“ beschäftigt sich mit Fragen und Antworten zu Diagnostik und Klassifikation sowie Möglichkeiten des Ausschlusses von Zusatzverletzungen. Die Referenten erläutern, welche Frakturen konservativ behandelt werden können und wie. Das Webinar beantwortet die Frage nach aktuellen operativen Therapiekonzepten: Welcher Zugang, welches Osteosynthesematerial? Auf was muss bei der Nachbehandlung der distalen Radiusfraktur geachtet werden?

PD Dr. med. Oliver Pieske
Dr. med. Benjamin Meyknecht
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“

CME: 2 Punkte

Dr. med. Mihailo Andric
Inhalte des Webinars zur S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“ sind die Darstellung des Projektes und des Erstellungswegs zur S1-Leitlinie, die Erläuterung der klinischen Relevanz der Klassifikation EAES 2015, die wissenschaftliche Begründung der wichtigsten Empfehlungen und die Darstellung stadiengerechter Therapieoptionen.

Dr. med. Mihailo Andric
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.