Necrotizing Fasciitis Following Endoscopic Harvesting of the Greater Saphenous Vein for Coronary Artery Bypass Graft

Liliav, Benjamin; Yakoub, Danny; Kasabian, Armen K.

doi:10.4293/108680811x13022985131453

Cited by 6 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 27 publications

(14 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…GSV remains the most common conduit for CABG, which is the most common operation in cardiac surgery. Multiple studies in the literature have examined surgical site infection (SSI) after GSV harvested, and these show advantage of EVH (3%-13%) vs. OVH (12%-43%) [7] .The incidence of infection is (20%) in OVH group without any recorded infection in EVH group in our study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 49%

Effect of Endoscopic Versus Open Saphenous Vein Harvesting Technique on Leg Wound Complications

Mubarak¹

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: EVH has become prevalent in recent years due to its reduced morbidity and increased patient satisfaction. We designed and carried out a prospective study of patients undergoing CABG to compare outcomes of open versus endoscopic harvesting technique for great saphenous vein. Two groups of patients who underwent elective Coronary artery bypass grafting at our hospitals between January 2018 and October 2020 were included. Endoscopic vein harvesting group (50 patients) was performed endoscopic technique compared with Open Vein Harvesting group (50 patients) was performed open surgical incision for harvesting. Both groups were demographically similar and received identical management. Leg wound was evaluated at discharge, 2 weeks, and 4 weeks for evidence of complications. Early outcomes were compared included, infection, gaped wound and re-suture, pain, satisfied cosmetically and mobilization. Results: Endoscopic vein harvesting group had increased harvest time and decreased incision closure time when compared with Open Vein Harvesting. The average hospitalization time was 6.5 ± 2.2 days for Endoscopic vein harvesting group and 9.2 ± 2.9 days for Open Vein Harvesting group. In Endoscopic vein harvesting group, no significant hematomas were observed. In Open Vein Harvesting group, hematomas were detected in 2 patients and were surgically evacuated. In Endoscopic vein harvesting group, edema occurred less frequently. Infection of the incision location did not occur in Endoscopic vein harvesting group. Leg wound complications were significantly reduced in Endoscopic vein harvesting group in comparison with Open Vein Harvesting group. Conclusions: Endoscopic vein harvesting decreases leg wound complications and increases patient’s satisfaction cosmetically.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 49%

Effect of Endoscopic Versus Open Saphenous Vein Harvesting Technique on Leg Wound Complications

Mubarak¹

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…GSV remains the most common conduit for CABG, which is the most common operation in cardiac surgery. Surgical site infection (SSI) incidence after GSV harvesting was 3%-13% in EVH vs. 12%-43% in OVH [Liliav 2011]. In our study, leg wound infection incidence was 20% in the OVH group without any recorded infection in the EVH group.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 53%

Leg Wound Complications: A Comparison Between Endoscopic and Open Saphenous Vein Harvesting Techniques

Mubarak

Abdeljawad

2021

HSF

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The most common conduit for coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery is saphenous vein graft (SVG). There are two techniques for SVG harvesting: open and endoscopic. Our aim is to evaluate clinical results of endoscopic versus open SVG harvesting. Nowadays, endoscopic vein harvesting (EVH) has become prevalent because of reduced complications with more patient satisfaction. Objective: We designed and performed a prospective randomized cohort study of patients undergoing CABG to compare the results of open versus endoscopic harvesting technique. Methods: Patients who underwent elective CABG at our hospitals were divided into two groups, during the period of January 2019 to March 2021. The EVH group (50 patients) underwent endoscopic technique compared with the open vein harvesting (OVH) group (50 patients) that was underwent open surgical incision for great saphenous vein (GSV) harvesting. The two groups demographically were similar and received identical management. Leg wound was evaluated at discharge, two weeks, and four weeks for evidence of any complications. Early outcomes were recorded, including infection, gaped wound and surgical re-suture, degree of pain, level of cosmetic satisfaction, and early mobilization. Results: In the EVH group, harvesting time increased, and incision closure time decreased in comparison with OVH. The hospital stay was 5.5 ± 2.4 days in the EVH group versus 9.5 ± 2.7 days in the OVH group. Leg wound complications were significantly reduced in the EVH group in comparison with the OVH group. Conclusions: Endoscopic vein harvesting technique reduced leg wound complications. Conveniently, patients also were cosmetically satisfied.

show abstract

“…In this instance, the infection occurred at the venous donor site while the bypass itself continued to function. 6 To our knowledge, there are no documented cases of an NSTI following peripheral bypass. When comparing infectious complications for vascular surgical procedures as a whole, surgical site infections (SSI) following peripheral bypass are more frequent than those for open abdominal or thoracic aortic repair (1.38% vs. 1.06% and 1.3%, respectively).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Necrotizing Soft Tissue Infection Following a Peripheral Bypass

Richards

Clark

Bowen

et al. 2015

Annals of Vascular Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Necrotizing Fasciitis Following Endoscopic Harvesting of the Greater Saphenous Vein for Coronary Artery Bypass Graft

Abstract: Clinicians should be aware of this rare, potentially lethal infection following minimally invasive vein harvesting techniques.

Cited by 6 publications

References 27 publications

Effect of Endoscopic Versus Open Saphenous Vein Harvesting Technique on Leg Wound Complications

Effect of Endoscopic Versus Open Saphenous Vein Harvesting Technique on Leg Wound Complications

Leg Wound Complications: A Comparison Between Endoscopic and Open Saphenous Vein Harvesting Techniques

Necrotizing Soft Tissue Infection Following a Peripheral Bypass

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About