Leg wound infections following greater saphenous vein harvesting: Minimally invasive vein harvesting versus conventional vein harvesting

International Journal of Lower Extremity Wounds

Volumn 7, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 210-219

  Reed III, James F ^a  

^a CHRISTIANA CARE HEALTH SYSTEM   (United States)

Author keywords

Conventional vein harvesting; Endoscopic vein harvesting; Meta analysis; Saphenous vein harvesting; Wound complications

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; HUMAN; INFECTION RATE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SAPHENOUS VEIN; WOUND HEALING; WOUND INFECTION;

CORONARY ARTERY BYPASS; ENDOSCOPY; HUMANS; SAPHENOUS VEIN; SURGICAL PROCEDURES, MINIMALLY INVASIVE; SURGICAL WOUND INFECTION; TIME FACTORS; TISSUE AND ORGAN HARVESTING;

EID: 57449087459     PISSN: 15347346     EISSN: 15526941     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1534734608324172     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Athanasiou T., Aziz O., Skapinakis P., et al. Leg wound infection after coronary artery bypass grafting: a meta-analysis comparing minimally invasive versus conventional vein harvesting. Ann Thorac Surg. 2003 ; 76: 2141-2146.
2. Athanasiou T., Aziz O., Al- Ruzzeh S., et al. Are wound healing disturbances and length of hospital stay reduced with minimally invasive vein harvest? A meta-analysis. Eur J Cardiothoracic Surg. 2004 ; 26: 1015-1026.
3. Moher D., Cook DJ, Eastwood S., Olkin I., Rennie D., Stroup DF Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses. Lancet. 1999 ; 354: 1896-1900.
4. Mantel N., Haenszel W. Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1959 ; 22: 719-748.
5. Yusuf S., Peto R., Lewis J., Collins R., Sleight P. Beta blockade during and after myocardial infarction: an overview of the randomized trials. Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 1985 ; 27: 335-371.
6. DerSimonian R., Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1986 ; 7: 177-188.
7. Paul SR, Donner A. Small sample performance of tests of homogeneity of odds ratios in K 2 × 2 tables. Stat Med. 1992 ; 11: 159-165.
8. Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ. 2003 ; 327: 557-560.
9. Higgins JP, Thompson SG Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2002 ; 21: 1539-1558.
10. Egger M., Davey Smith G., Schneider M., Minder C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple graphical test. BMJ. 1997 ; 315: 629-634.
11. Galbraith RF A note on graphical presentation of estimated odds ratios from several clinical trials. Stat Med. 1999 ; 7: 889-894.
12. Thompson SG, Sharp SJ Explaining heterogeneity in meta-analysis: a comparison of methods. Stat Med. 1999 ; 18: 2693-2708.
13. Bax L., Yu LM, Ikeda N., Tsuruta H., Moons KG Development and validation of MIX: comprehensive free software for meta-analysis of causal research data. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2006 ; 6: 50.
14. Bax L., Yu LM, Ikeda N., Tsuruta H., Moons KG MIX: comprehensive free software for meta-analysis of causal research data. Version 1.7. http://mix-for-meta-analysis.info/ ; 2008.
15. Allen KB, Heimansohn DA, Robison RJ, et al. Risk factors for leg wound complications following endoscopic versus traditional saphenous vein harvesting. Heart Surg Forum. 2000 ; 3: 325-330.
16. Carpino PA, Khabbaz KR, Bojar RM, et al. Clinical benefits of endoscopic vein harvesting in patients with risk factors for saphenectomy wound infections undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2000 ; 119: 69-75.
17. Cisowski M., Wites M., Gerber W., Drzewiecka-Gerber A., Bochenek A. Minimally invasive saphenous vein harvesting for coronary artery bypass grafting-comparison of three less invasive methods. Med Sci Monit. 2000 ; 6: 735-739.
18. Fabricius AM, Diegeler A., Doll N., Weidenbach H., Mohr FW Minimally invasive saphenous vein harvesting techniques: morphology and postoperative outcome. Ann Thorac Surg. 2000 ; 70: 473-478.
19. Galbraith GF, Pica-Furey W. A retrospective comparative study of open and endoscopic saphenous vein harvesting. J Endovasc Ther. 2000 ; 7: 460-468.
20. Marty B., von Segesser LK, Tozzi P., et al. Benefits of endoscopic vein harvesting. World J Surg. 2000 ; 24: 1104-1107.
21. Düsterhöft V., Bauer M., Buz S., Schaumann B., Hetzer R. Wound-healing disturbances after vein harvesting for CABG: a randomized trial to compare the minimally invasive direct vision and traditional approaches. Ann Thorac Surg. 2001 ; 72: 2038-2043.
22. Lutz CW, Hillmann R., Lutter G., Schoellhorn J., Beyersdorf F. Endoscopic vs. conventional vein harvesting: first results with a new, non-disposable system. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2001 ; 49: 321-327
23. Patel AN, Hebeler RF, Hamman BL, et al. Prospective analysis of endoscopic vein harvesting. Am J Surg. 2001 ; 182: 716-719.
24. Bitondo JM, Daggett WM, Torchiana DF, et al. Endoscopic versus open saphenous vein harvest: a comparison of postoperative wound complications. Ann Thorac Surg. 2002 ; 73: 523-528.
25. Bonde P., Graham A., MacGowan S. Endoscopic vein harvest: early results of a prospective trial with open vein harvest. Heart Surg Forum. 2002 ; 5 (suppl 4). S378 - S391.
26. Black EA, Campbell RK, Channon KM, Ratnatunga C., Pillai R. Minimally invasive vein harvesting significantly reduces pain and wound morbidity. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2002 ; 22: 381-386.
27. Felisky CD, Paull DL, Hill ME, et al. Endoscopic greater saphenous vein harvesting reduces the morbidity of coronary artery bypass surgery. Am J Surg. 2002 ; 183: 576-579.
28. Kiaii B., Mood BC, Massel D., et al. A prospective randomized trial of endoscopic versus conventional harvesting of the saphenous vein in coronary artery bypass surgery. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2002 ; 123: 204-212.
29. Schurr UP, Lachat ML, Reuthebuch O., et al. Endoscopic saphenous vein harvesting for CABG-a randomized, prospective trial. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2002 ; 50: 160-163.
30. Bonde P., Graham AN, MacGowan SW Endoscopic vein harvest: advantages and limitations. Ann Thorac Surg. 2004 ; 77: 2076-2082.
31. Basbug HS, Tasatargil A., Aksoy NH, et al. Minimally invasive saphenous vein harvesting using a laryngoscope: procedural, functional, and morphologic evaluation. Heart Surg Forum. 2005 ; 8: E425 - E430.
32. Nasso G., Anselmi A., Modugno P., Alessandrini F. Minimally invasive saphenous vein harvesting guided by preoperative echotomography: results of a prospective randomized study. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2005 ; 4: 464-468.
33. O-Yurvati AH, Martin AK, Peska D. Minimally invasive saphenous vein harvest with the SaphLITE System. Int Surg. 2005 ; 90: 23-26.
34. Wang S., Tan H., Wilkinson V., et al. Saphenous vein harvest with SaphLITE System versus conventional technique: a prospective, randomized study. Ann Thorac Surg. 2005 ; 79: 2018-2023.
35. Yun K., Wu Y., Aharonian V., et al. Randomized trial of endoscopic versus open vein harvest for coronary artery bypass grafting: six-month patency rates. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2005 ; 129: 496-503.
36. Lai T., Babb Y., Ning Q., et al. The transition from open to endoscopic saphenous vein harvesting and its clinical impact: the Texas Heart Institute experience. Tex Heart Inst J. 2006 ; 33: 316-320.
37. Mahmood Z., Al Benna S., Nkere U., Murday A. Decreased morbidity following long saphenous vein harvesting using a minimally invasive technique: a randomized controlled trial comparing two techniques for long saphenous vein harvest. J Cardiothorac Surg. 2006 ; 1: 15.
38. Vaidyanathan KR, Sankar MN, Cherian KM Endoscopic vs conventional vein harvesting: a prospective analysis. Asian Cardiovasc Thorac Ann. 2008 ; 16: 134-138.