Hm. Tran et al., Tunnelling versus open harvest technique in obtaining venous conduits for coronary bypass surgery, EUR J CAR-T, 14(6), 1998, pp. 602-606
Background: The tunnelling as opposed to the open harvest technique for har
vesting long saphenous vein for coronary artery bypass procedures is a less
frequently used technique as it requires more handling of the vein and thi
s may induce trauma. This study aims to compare the degree of endothelial d
enudation and donor site morbidity between the two different harvest techni
ques. Methods: Saphenous vein segments in 78 patients (45 in tunnelling ver
sus 33 in open harvest group) undergoing coronary artery bypass procedures
were examined by light microscopy and graded according to the extent of end
othelial denudation varying from grade 1 (most preserved) to grade 6 (>90%
endothelial denudation). Clinical parameters relating to donor site morbidi
ty including leg wound pain and infection were also assessed. Results: Ther
e was no statistical difference in the age, sex, macroscopic vein quality,
length and time taken to harvest the veins between the two groups. The tunn
elling technique always used thigh saphenous vein whereas nearly a third of
veins harvested by the open harvest technique were lower leg veins (P = 0.
001). The tunnelling technique resulted in an endothelial score of 2.5 comp
ared with 3.3 for the open harvest technique (P < 0.001). In addition, saph
enous vein tunnelling resulted in significantly less leg wound pain (1.2 vs
. 1.8, P = 0.001), no leg wound infection (compared with 12.2% in open harv
est group, P = 0.02) and produced cosmetically more acceptable scars. Furth
ermore, length of hospital stay was significantly prolonged to 19.3 days in
those with leg wound infection compared to 8.7 days in those without leg w
ound infection (P < 0.001). Conclusions: These results show that saphenous
vein tunnelling is an attractive alternative to the open harvest technique
in obtaining venous conduits for coronary artery bypass procedures. (C) 199
8 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.