Endovascular correction in acute bleeding after femoro-popliteal bypass: a single-center experience

Abstract

Background: The endovascular correction (EC) has emerged in recent years as a possible alternative to surgical revision (SR) in case of bleeding complications after peripheral bypass (PB). The purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of EC compared to SR in case of bleeding complications of PB.

Methods: From January 2004 to December 2014, we have submitted 32 patients to surgery for acute bleeding in previous PB (25 venous bypass, in situ or reversed, 6 PTFE bypass and 1 composite bypass). The cause of the bleeding was the dehiscence of proximal anastomosis in 14 patients, the dehiscence of distal anastomosis in 11 patients and the rupture of the graft in 7 patients. All patients postoperatively underwent anticoagulation or antiplatelet therapy, antibiotic therapy and close ultrasound follow-up. Patency rate, limb salvage rate and survival rate in the short term were assessed by Kaplan-Meier curves.

Results: Of the 32 patients treated for acute bleeding in previous PB, 11 underwent endovascular correction with a technical success of 100% (no need for reintervention), while in 21 patients a surgical revision was performed. Among the latter, in 4 cases (19.1%) an early bleeding occurred, and endovascular correction was promptly performed solving the bleeding in the absence of sequelae (then a total of 15 patients were treated by endovascular correction). The 12-month patency, limb salvage and survival rates were respectively 71.4%, 88.2% and 88.2% in the SR group and 80%, 93.3% and 100% in the EC.

Conclusions: This topic underlines that endovascular correction after peripheral bypass bleeding is an attractive alternative to surgery, but there are still a few data to change the gold standard treatment. Randomized clinical trials comparing the two treatment options are warranted.